Public Document Pack
Jeff Hughes Head of Democratic and Legal Support Services
MEETING : DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT (FORMERLY CONTROL) COMMITTEE VENUE : COUNCIL CHAMBER, WALLFIELDS, HERTFORD DATE : WEDNESDAY 14 AUGUST 2013 TIME : 7.00 PM
PLEASE NOTE TIME AND VENUE
MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE:
Councillor Mrs R Cheswright (Chairman). Councillors M Alexander, D Andrews, E Bedford, S Bull, A Burlton, K Crofton, G Jones, P Moore, M Newman (Vice-Chairman), N Symonds and G Williamson.
Substitutes:
Conservative Group: Councillors T Page and K Warnell. Liberal Democrat Group: Councillor M Wood. Independent Group:
(Note: Substitution arrangements must be notified by the absent Member to Democratic Services 7 hours before the meeting)
Contact Officer: Peter Mannings Tel: 01279 502174 [email protected]
This agenda has been printed using 100% recycled paper
DISCLOSABLE PECUNIARY INTERESTS
1. A Member, present at a meeting of the Authority, or any committee, sub-committee, joint committee or joint sub-committee of the Authority, with a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest (DPI) in any matter to be considered or being considered at a meeting:
• must not participate in any discussion of the matter at the meeting;
• must not participate in any vote taken on the matter at the meeting;
• must disclose the interest to the meeting, whether registered or not, subject to the provisions of section 32 of the Localism Act 2011;
• if the interest is not registered and is not the subject of a pending notification, must notify the Monitoring Officer of the interest within 28 days;
• must leave the room while any discussion or voting takes place.
2. A DPI is an interest of a Member or their partner (which means spouse or civil partner, a person with whom they are living as husband or wife, or a person with whom they are living as if they were civil partners) within the descriptions as defined in the Localism Act 2011.
3. The Authority may grant a Member dispensation, but only in limited circumstances, to enable him/her to participate and vote on a matter in which they have a DPI.
4. It is a criminal offence to:
• fail to disclose a disclosable pecuniary interest at a meeting if it is not on the register; • fail to notify the Monitoring Officer, within 28 days, of a DPI that is not on the register that a Member disclosed to a meeting; • participate in any discussion or vote on a matter in which a Member has a DPI; • knowingly or recklessly provide information that is false or misleading in notifying the Monitoring Officer of a DPI or in disclosing such interest to a meeting.
(Note: The criminal penalties available to a court are to impose a fine not exceeding level 5 on the standard scale and disqualification from being a councillor for up to 5 years.)
AGENDA:
1. Apology
To receive apologies for absence.
2. Chairman's Announcements
3. Declarations of Interest
4. Minutes – 17 July 2013
To confirm the Minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on Wednesday 17 July 2013 (Previously circulated as part of the Council Minute book for 24 July 2013).
5. Planning Applications and Unauthorised Development for Consideration by the Committee (Pages 9 – 12).
(A) 3/13/0343/SV - Modification of S106 agreement for 3/10/1522/FP to reduce the affordable housing provision from 23 units to 15 units on grounds of economic viability at Wallace Land, Buntingford Road, Puckeridge, SG11 1RT for Rialto Homes Ltd (Pages 13 – 22).
3/13/0343/SV – Recommended for Approval.
(B) 3/13/0551/FP - Redevelopment of the site to provide 130 residential units, 100 sqm of retail floor space, provision of a link road between Mill Road and Mead Lane and passenger interchange, associated car parking and landscaping at Land junction of Mill Road/Mead Lane, Hertford for Redrow Homes Ltd and B R Residuary Board. (Pages 23 – 54).
3/13/0551/FP – Recommended for Approval.
(C) 3/13/0527/FP - Demolition of the former stables, coach house and educational buildings. Change of use and conversion of Pearse House to create 12 no. apartments, erection of 10 no. dwellings, associated parking, garaging, alterations to access, refuse and recycling storage, and landscaping at Pearse House, Parsonage Lane, Bishop's Stortford, CM23 5BQ for Marden Homes Ltd. (Pages 55 – 78).
3/13/0527/FP – Recommended for Approval.
(D) 3/13/0901/FP - Erection of two-storey central archive building on site of demolished buildings P8 and P10 adjacent to northern site boundary, with modifications to road layout to interior of site, landscaping, installation of proposed earth ducts and other works for GlaxoSmithKline Services Ltd, Priory Street, Ware, SG12 0DJ. (Pages 79 – 86).
3/13/0901/FP – Recommended for Approval.
(E) a) 3/13/0940/FP and b) 3/13/0941/LB - Alterations and change of use of two Class B1 office buildings to create 14no. 1 and 2 bed residential dwellings at Buildings 6 and 7, Bluecoats Avenue, Hertford, Herts, SG14 1PU for Bluecoats Joint Venture (Pages 87 – 108).
a) 3/13/0940/FP – Recommended for Approval. b) 3/13/0941/LB – Recommended for Approval.
(F) 3/13/0922/FO - Variation of Condition 3 (LPA ref 3/11/1103/FP) - 'The use of the Aisled Barn and the conservatory at Dane Tree House for wedding ceremonies and receptions hereby permitted shall cease on or before two years after the date of decision' to allow the date to be extended until 14/09/14 at The Henry Moore Foundation, Dane Tree House, Perry Green, Much Hadham, SG10 6EE for The Henry Moore Foundation. (Pages 109 – 122).
3/13/0922/FO – Recommended for Approval.
(G) 3/13/0813/OP - Development of site to provide 13 family dwelling houses with associated car parking and landscaping - Land to North of Park Farm Industrial Estate, Ermine Street, Buntingford. (Pages 123 – 138).
3/13/0813/OP – Recommended for Approval.
(H) a) 3/12/1955/FP and b) 3/12/1956/LB - Demolition of the existing outbuildings and renovation of the former Victorian School. Development of the former school playground and outdoor space for 5no 4 bed dwellings and 2no 2 bed flats at Musley Infant School, Musley Hill, Ware SG12 7NB for Musley Hill Development Ltd. (Pages 139 – 168).
a) 3/12/1955/FP – Recommended for Approval. b) 3/12/1956/LB – Recommended for Approval.
(I) 3/12/2063/FP - Demolition of existing 3 garage blocks and erection of 4 two-storey semi-detached houses with three bedrooms, private amenity space and car parking at Garage Site to the North of 9 Three Stiles, Benington, Stevenage, SG2 7LD for South Anglia Housing (Pages 169 – 188).
3/12/2063/FP – Recommended for Approval.
(J) 3/13/0714/FP - Construction of detached dwelling at Camelot, 9, Church End, Braughing, SG11 2QA for Mr J Haworth. (Pages 189 – 200).
3/13/0714/FP – Recommended for Approval.
(K) 3/13/1003/FP - Change of use of outbuilding to residential annex at White House Lodge, Hare Street, Buntingford, SG9 0DX for Ms A Stewart (Pages 201 – 208).
3/13/1003/FP – Recommended for Approval.
(L) 3/13/1078/FP - Part two storey, part single storey rear extension following demolition of existing conservatory at 24, Pinelands, Bishop's Stortford for Mr M Kingsland (Pages 209 – 214).
3/13/1078/FP – Recommended for Approval.
6. Items for Reporting and Noting (Pages 215 – 252).
(A) Appeals against refusal of Planning Permission/ non-determination.
(B) Planning Appeals Lodged.
(C) Planning Appeals: Inquiry and Informal Hearing Dates.
(D) Planning Statistics.
7. Urgent Business
To consider such other business as, in the opinion of the Chairman of the meeting, is of sufficient urgency to warrant consideration and is not likely to involve the disclosure of exempt information.
This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 5 EAST HERTS COUNCIL
DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE – 14 AUGUST 2013
REPORT BY DIRECTOR OF NEIGHBOURHOOD SERVICES
5. PLANNING APPLICATIONS AND UNAUTHORISED DEVELOPMENT FOR CONSIDERATION BY THE COMMITTEE
WARD(S) AFFECTED: As identified separately for each application and unauthorised development matter.
Purpose/Summary of Report:
• To enable planning and related applications and unauthorised development matters to be considered and determined by the Committee, as appropriate, or as set out for each agenda item.
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR DEVELOPMENT MANGEMENT COMMITTEE
(A) A recommendation is set out separately for each application and unauthorised development matter.
1.0 Display of Plans
1.1 Plans for consideration at this meeting will be displayed outside the Council Chamber from 5.00 pm on the day of the meeting. An Officer will be present from 6.30 pm to advise on plans if required. A selection of plans will be displayed electronically at the meeting. Members are reminded that those displayed do not constitute the full range of plans submitted for each matter and they should ensure they inspect those displayed outside the room prior to the meeting.
1.2 All of the plans and associated documents on any of the planning applications included in the agenda can be viewed at: http://online.eastherts.gov.uk/swiftlg/apas/run/wphappcriteria.displ ay
1.3 Members will need to input the planning lpa reference then click on that application reference. Members can then use the media items tab to view the associated documents, such as the plans and other documents relating to an application.
Page 9 2.0 Implications/Consultations
2.1 Information on any corporate issues and consultation associated with this report can be found within Essential Reference Paper ‘A’.
Background Papers The papers which comprise each application/ unauthorised development file. In addition, the East of England Plan, Hertfordshire County Council’s Minerals and Waste documents, the East Hertfordshire Local Plan and, where appropriate, the saved policies from the Hertfordshire County Structure Plan, comprise background papers where the provisions of the Development Plan are material planning issues.
Contact Member: Councillor M Alexander, Deputy Leader and Executive Member for Community Safety and Environment. [email protected]
Contact Officers: Kevin Steptoe – Head of Planning and Building Control, Extn: 1407. [email protected] Alison Young – Development Manager, Extn: 1553. [email protected]
Report Author: Kevin Steptoe – Head of Planning and Building Control, Extn: 1407. [email protected]
Page 10 ESSENTIAL REFERENCE PAPER ‘A’
IMPLICATIONS/CONSULTATIONS:
Contribution to People the Council’s This priority focuses on enhancing the quality of life, Corporate health and wellbeing, particularly for those who are Priorities/ vulnerable, and delivering strong services Objectives (delete as Place appropriate): This priority focuses on sustainability, the built environment and ensuring our towns and villages are safe and clean.
Prosperity This priority focuses on safeguarding and enhancing our unique mix of rural and urban communities, promoting sustainable, economic opportunities and delivering cost effective services.
Consultation: As set out separately in relation to each matter.
Legal: As set out separately in relation to each matter if any are appropriate.
Financial: As set out separately in relation to each matter if any are appropriate.
Human As set out separately in relation to each matter if any are Resource: appropriate.
Risk As set out separately in relation to each matter if any are Management: appropriate.
Page 11 This page is intentionally left blank
Page 12 Agenda Item 5a 5a 3/13/0343/SV – Modification of S106 agreement for 3/10/1522/FP to reduce the affordable housing provision from 23 units to 15 units on grounds of economic viability at Wallace Land, Buntingford Road, Puckeridge, SG11 1RT for Rialto Homes Ltd.
Date of Receipt: 11.03.2013 Type: Major – Variation of S106
Parish: STANDON
Ward: PUCKERIDGE
RECOMMENDATION:
That East Herts Council agree to a variation of the Section 106 agreement to reduce the number of affordable houses to 15 units comprising of 9 units for social rent and 6 units shared ownership subject to the following time limit and conditions:
• If, after 18 months from the date of this resolution to grant permission for a variation of the Section 106 agreement, the first residential dwellinghouse is not fully completed and made ready for occupation, the number of affordable units required to be provided shall revert to the original Section 106 agreement.
• If the developer requires a further viability appraisal to be carried out subsequent to that, the developer shall submit an updated viability appraisal to the Local Planning Authority and shall reimburse the Council for all its reasonable costs incurred in respect of its evaluation of such further appraisal.
Summary of Reasons for Decision
East Herts Council has considered the applicant’s proposal in a positive and proactive manner with regard to the policies of the Development Plan (Minerals Local Plan, Waste Core Strategy and Development Management Policies DPD 2012 and the ’saved’ policies of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007); the National Planning Policy Framework and in accordance with the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2012 (as amended). The balance of the considerations having regard to those policies and the viability information submitted is that permission should be granted. (034313SV.MP)
1.0 Background:
1.1 The application was reported to the July 2013 meeting of the Development Management Committee where Members deferred the Page 13 3/13/0343/SV
application and requested Officers to negotiate with the applicant and explore the potential for the provision of a higher quantum of affordable housing as part of the development.
1.2 The report submitted to the July meeting is attached as Essential Reference Paper A and sets out the history of the site and Officers considerations in respect of viability.
2.0 Considerations:
2.1 Subsequent to the July meeting Officers have met with the applicant on this matter. The proposal now comes forward with a level of affordable housing increased from 13 to 15 units. The applicant advises that an increase in the level of affordable housing is only achievable, in viability terms, if the tenure mix is also varied. As such the applicant proposes the provision of 9 social rent units and the remainder (6), to be shared ownership.
2.2 The Councils Housing Team has commented that the provision of affordable housing of the tenure mix proposed is acceptable.
2.3 Officers have asked the Councils viability assessor – DVS, to review the financial circumstances of the proposals. They advise that the increase in affordable houses continues to have the impact that, in financial terms, the development remains unviable.
2.4 Whilst that is the case, the applicant has indicated a willingness to proceed with the scheme on the basis now put forward. This is as a result of a complex mixture of market and financial constraints that they face.
3.0 Conclusion:
3.1 Having regard to the above considerations and those contained within Essential Reference Paper A, Officers are of the opinion that the now proposed level of affordable housing proposed is acceptable, having regard to the requirements of the National Planning Policy Framework. Officers therefore recommend that the application be approved and the Section 106 agreement be amended.
Page 14 Essential Reference Paper A
3/13/0343/SV – Modification of Section 106 agreement for 3/10/1522/FP to reduce the affordable housing provision from 23 units to 13 units on grounds of economic viability at Wallace Land, Buntingford Road, Puckeridge, SG11 1RT for Rialto Homes Ltd
Date of Receipt: 11.03.2013 Type: Major – Variation of S106
Parish: STANDON
Ward: PUCKERIDGE
RECOMMENDATION:
That East Herts Council agree to a variation of the Section 106 agreement to reduce the number of affordable houses to 13 units comprising of 10 units for social rent and 3 units shared ownership subject to the following time limit and condition:
• If, after 18 months from the date of this resolution to grant planning permission for the variation of the Section 106 agreement, the first residential dwellinghouse is not fully completed and made ready for occupation, the developer shall submit an updated viability appraisal to the Local Planning Authority. If the viability appraisal shows that a change in the number of affordable dwellings would result in a viable scheme, the applicant shall be required to vary the level of affordable housing through an amended Section 106 agreement.
• That the applicant pay the Council all reasonable costs in the event that an independent review of their viability appraisal is required.
Summary of Reasons for Decision
East Herts Council has considered the applicant’s proposal in a positive and proactive manner with regard to the policies of the Development Plan (Minerals Local Plan, Waste Core Strategy and Development Management Policies DPD 2012 and the ’saved’ policies of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007; the National Planning Policy Framework and in accordance with the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2012 (as amended). The balance of the considerations having regard to those policies and the viability information submitted is that permission should be granted. (034313SV.MP)
Page 15 3/13/0343/SV
1.0 Background:
1.1 The application site is shown on the attached OS extract and comprises of a large parcel of land to the north of the village of Puckeridge. The site is bordered to the south by Mentley Lane East and the west and north by the A10. To the east of the site is Buntingford Road, and residential dwellings along that road.
1.2 Planning permission was granted by the Council on 6 June 2011 for the erection of 58 residential units, associated car parking, access, amenity space and landscaping (ref: 3/10/1522/FP). The approved development included a Section 106 agreement requiring various financial contributions towards education, sustainable transport measures and open space. The Section 106 agreement also required the provision of affordable housing comprising of 23 units with 12 social rented and 11 shared ownership dwellings. The development has not yet been started, although various archaeological work and some landscape work has been undertaken on the site.
1.3 This application seeks a reduction in the level of affordable housing on grounds of economic viability. A viability report has been submitted by the applicant which is discussed below.
2.0 Site History:
2.1 The relevant planning history for the site is as mentioned above – 3/10/1522/FP – planning consent was granted for the erection of 58 residential dwellings.
2.2 Planning permission has also been granted for a temporary access to the development site under LPA reference 3/12/1593/FP.
3.0 Consultation Responses:
3.1 The Council’s Housing Team has commented that the reduction in affordable housing to 13 units (10 social rent and 3 shared ownership) is acceptable having regard to the submitted viability appraisal.
4.0 Parish Council Representations:
3.5 Standon Parish Council objects to the application. The Council comment that many local people are not able to afford the high prices demanded for market housing in the villages of Standon and Puckeridge and they are unable to stay and live within the village. The Parish Council considers that the agreements within the Section 106 Page 16 3/13/0343/SV
are important and this is part of the planning permission for the site which the developer accepted. The Parish Council do not consider it to be acceptable that the applicant seeks to reduce the affordable housing to make profit at the expense of the local community.
5.0 Other Representations:
5.1 The application has been advertised by way of press notice, site notice and neighbour notification.
5.2 5 letters of representation have been received which can be summarised as follows:
• The reason for the level of affordable housing at the approved level remain – there is a need for lower cost housing for young people and families; • There is a lack of affordable housing and this development as approved will provide that housing; • The applicants claim that the cost of purchase of the land was too high and additional archaeological work increased costs is disingenuous as they are an experienced housing developer who should anticipate this and undertake proper research; • The resale figures in the viability report are too low and not a true reflection of Standon and Puckeridge.
6.0 Policy:
6.1 The relevant ‘saved’ Local Plan policies in this application include the following:
• HSG3 Affordable Housing • IMP1 – Planning Conditions and Obligations
6.2 The Planning Obligations SPD and NPPF (National Planning Policy Framework) are also of relevance.
7.0 Considerations:
7.1 The main planning considerations in respect of this application is whether the reduction in the level of affordable housing is justified, in planning terms.
7.2 The approved residential development of the site comprises of 23 affordable units with a tenure mix of 12 social rent and 11 shared Page 17 3/13/0343/SV
ownership which is in accordance with the Councils policy for affordable housing provision, as set out in HSG3 of the Local Plan. That policy requires the provision of 40% affordable homes. The reduction in affordable housing as proposed in this application is therefore a departure to the Local Plan Policy.
7.3 In considering this application the Council should have regard to the NPPF which sets out that sustainable development is the golden thread running throughout the planning process and that the core planning principle should be to proactively drive and support sustainable economic development to deliver the homes that the country needs. In pursing sustainable development, the NPPF sets out that careful attention should be made to viability. The NPPF sets out that, to ensure viability, the costs of any requirements likely to be applied to development including affordable housing should, when taking account of the normal cost of development, provide competitive returns to a willing developer to enable the development to be deliverable.
7.4 The developer has an extant permission for a residential development which was allocated for housing as part of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007. The acceptability of the site for housing development has therefore previously been addressed and the developer is willing to implement that permission subject to review of the level of affordable housing provided in order to make the development of the site viable.
7.5 To demonstrate this and, in accordance with the Council’s Affordable Housing SPD, a viability assessment has been submitted by the applicant. The aforementioned SPD requires that any financial appraisal be considered independently. An independent review of the applicant’s viability appraisal has been undertaken by the DVS, which is the commercial arm of the Valuation Office Agency.
7.6 DVS comment that, following their research and assessment, a fully policy compliant scheme, which includes 40% affordable housing, produces a residual land value of £1,491,693 or £980,312 per hectare. This is some £608,307 below the benchmarked land value. If this value is inputted the appraisal shows a deficit of £758,658. DVS have advised the Council that a policy compliant scheme is not therefore viable.
7.7 As part of this application, the applicant initially proposed a reduction in affordable units comprising of 11 affordable units. DVS considered such a reduction but found that this would provide a significant surplus of around £170,000 when taking into account a profit of 20% for the applicant. Page 18 3/13/0343/SV
7.8 In consultation with the applicant, DVS amended the affordable housing provision on the basis of 22.4% affordable housing which represents 13 units with 75% (10) social rent and 25% (3) shared ownership. This, in the opinion of DVS, is the maximum level of affordable housing which shows a viable scheme with minimal of surplus and all other financial contributions retained.
7.9 The applicant has accepted such a reduced level of affordable housing and the Councils Housing Team have commented that such a reduction is acceptable, in this case.
7.10 DVS recommend that that the reduction in affordable housing is accepted on the basis of it being time limited and consideration be given to an overage clause if values improve over the period.
7.11 Members will note that Officers have recommended that a time limit be attached with any variation of the agreement. The time limit is considered to be reasonable in the current market conditions and allows the level of affordable housing to be reviewed should there be a change in the market. Having regard to this recommended time limit and that the application only seeks to reduce affordable housing and not other financial contributions, Officers do not consider that an overage clause within the Section 106 to be necessary, in this case.
7.12 A third party representative raises concern that the market values for the dwellings as submitted in the applicants viability appraisal are too low and the developer has included significant costs in archaeology and that this would impact on the viability of the scheme. DVS have considered the market values and comment that the values submitted are broadly acceptable. DVS also broadly agree to the build costs which would include any onsite works relating to archaeology.
7.13 Officers note the comments from third parties and the Parish Council in respect of the reduction in affordable housing. Officers acknowledge that there is a need for affordable dwellings within the immediate and wider locality. However, Officers would comment that viability and delivery of dwellings is a key planning consideration and a policy compliant scheme as originally granted planning permission has not shown to be viable.
8.0 Conclusion:
8.1 The Council have a commitment to ensure that appropriate levels of housing are provided across the District and this site has an extant permission and has been allocated in the Local Plan process for Page 19 3/13/0343/SV
housing. The National Planning Policy approach is to encourage sustainable development and ensure that viability is considered to ensure delivery for the wider benefit of the economy. The site is in a sustainable location and the delivery of this scheme will not only provide a significant level of housing for the local community but will also encourage economic development which is a key consideration as required in the NPPF. Officers therefore consider that significant weight should be attached to the viability justification provided for a reduced level of affordable housing and therefore recommend that the application be approved and the Section 106 be amended.
Page 20 BBB BBB
1 1 1 113133 333 666 668688 888
SITE
7
4
1 4
BBB
BBB
1 BBB 3 UUU UUU UUU NNN NNN NNN TTT TTT TTT I I I
INININ
INININ
7 NNN 2 GGG GGG GGG FFF FFF FFF OOO OOO OOO RRR RRR RRR DDD DDD DDD
R R R R R R RRR OOO OOO OOO AAA AAA AAA DDD DDD DDD
CCC CCC CCC HHH HHH HHH EEE EEE
EEE 3 QQQ QQQ
QQQ UUU 7
UUU UUU 1 EEE EEE EEE RRR RRR RRR SSS SSS SSS 1 LLL
CCCLLL
5 1
Garage
7 4
MMMEEENNNTTTLLLEEEYYY L LLAAANNNEEE E EEAAASSSTTT MMMEEENNNTTTLLLEEEYYY L LLAAANNNEEE 5 White Hart
9 (PH)
1
2 1
6
8
13 12 0
1 6 8 8 o 5 t
1 2 1 Home 1 4 Farm
Court The Grange
3 7
2 9
1 6 1
2 1 1
9 1
6
T
h
e
C
8 h
1
1 a 7
6 9
1
s
e
1 9 5
2 1
1 2
1 23a 9 This copy has been produced specifically for Map Control Scheme purposes only. No further copies may be made Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown Copyright and may lead to prosecution or civil proceedings Reproduced from the Ordnance Survey map data with the permission of the controller of Her Majesty's Stationery Office Crown Copyright 2009 East Herts Council. LA Ref: 100018528 (
East Herts Council Address: Wallace Land, Buntingford Road, Puckeridge, SG11 1RT Wallfields Reference: 3/13/0343/SV Pegs Lane Hertford Scale: 1:2500 SG13 8EQ O.S Sheet: TL3823 Tel: 01279 655261 Date of Print: 28 June 2013 Page 21 This page is intentionally left blank
Page 22 Agenda Item 5b 5b 3/13/0551/FP – Redevelopment of the site to provide 130 residential units, 100 sqm of retail floor space, provision of a link road between Mill Road and Mead Lane and passenger interchange, associated car parking and landscaping at Land junction of Mill Road/Mead Lane, Hertford for Redrow Homes Ltd and B R Residuary Board
Date of Receipt: 23.04.2011 Type: Full – Major
Parish: HERTFORD
Ward: HERTFORD CASTLE
RECOMMENDATION:
That subject to the applicant or successor in title entering into a legal obligation pursuant to S106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to cover the following matters:
• £87,956 towards Primary Education;
• £47,376 towards Secondary Education;
• £17,878 towards Nursery Education;
• £5,534 towards Childcare;
• £1,212 towards Youth facilities;
• £12,278 towards Library services;
• £85,506.45 towards Outdoor Sports facilities;
• £8,221.56 towards Play facilities;
• The undertaking of highway improvement works as follows:
The provision of the Link Road including a 2m wide footway on the northern side, and a 3m wide cycle/footway on the southern side; The provision of a 3m wide bus lay-by for two buses and a bus shelter; The provision of a 3m wide shared cycle/footway on the eastern side of Mill Road adjacent to the application site; Narrowing of Mill Lane adjacent to the site to 7.3m; A Traffic Regulation Order to implement a bus only right turn from Mead Lane into the Link Road and provide adequate suitable warning signs to prohibit other vehicles from turning right at this Page 23 3/13/0551/FP
location; A Traffic Regulation Order to implement double yellow lines to prohibit parking along the Link Road.
• The provision of a two space Car Club and the submission of a scheme setting out details of the provider, timescales, implementation, parking space layout and associated infrastructure and signage.
• The provision of 40% affordable housing - 75% to be social rented and 25% to be shared ownership;
• The provision of 15% lifetime homes;
• Monitoring fee.
The Director of Neighbourhood Services be authorised to GRANT planning permission subject to the following conditions:
1. Three year time limit (1T12)
2. Approved Plans (2E10 – 02-001, 02-002, 02-003, 02-004, 02-005 rev A, 101 rev A, 102 rev A, 103 rev A, 104 rev A, 108 rev A, 109 rev A, 110 rev A, 111 rev A, 201 rev A, 202 rev A, 203 rev A, 204 rev A, 205 rev A, 206 rev A, 207 rev A, 208 rev A, 210 rev A, 211 rev A, 114, 115, 02- 117, 02-216, 301 rev A, 501 rev A, 502 rev A, 601 rev A, 602 rev A, 603 rev A, 604 rev A, 605 rev A, 606 rev A, 607 rev A, 1484 03 rev A, 1484 01 rev D, JNY7764-10 rev D, Plan 1, 1203/13/01 rev D)
3. Samples of materials (2E12)
4. Programme of archaeological work (2E02)
5. Levels (2E05)
6. Boundary walls and fences (2E07)
7. Refuse disposal facilities (2E24)
8. Lighting details (2E27)
9. Materials arising from demolition (2E32)
10. Prior to first occupation of the development, detailed plans of the highway works shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Page 24 3/13/0551/FP
Local Planning Authority, and the development shall not be occupied until the approved highway works, Link Road, junctions, access and car parking areas are completed in accordance with the approved plans and constructed to the specification of the Highway Authority and the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority.
Reason: To ensure the highway works are constructed to a satisfactory standard.
11. Prior to the commencement of development, a detailed construction management plan shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, and the plan shall include the following:
• The construction programme and phasing; • Hours of operation, delivery and storage of materials; • Details of any highway works necessary to enable the construction to take place; • Parking and loading arrangements; • Details of any hoarding; • Details of how pedestrian and cyclist safety will be maintained; • Management of traffic to reduce congestion; • Control of dust and dirt on the public highway; • Details of consultation with local businesses or neighbours; • Details of any other construction sites in the local area; • Waste management proposals.
Reason: In the interests of highway safety and to minimise the impact of construction on the local highway network.
12. Green Travel Plans (3V27)
13. Landscape design proposals (4P12 e, i, j, k, l)
14. Landscape maintenance (major sites only) (4P17)
15. Construction hours of working - plant and machinery (6N07)
16. The commercial unit hereby approved shall be used for A1 (shops), A2 (financial and professional services) or A3 (restaurants and cafés) purposes only and for no other use within the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987 (as amended).
Reason: To ensure that no alternative use is made of the premises which would be detrimental to the amenities of adjoining occupants in Page 25 3/13/0551/FP
accordance with policy ENV1 of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007.
17. Prior to the commencement of development additional reptile surveys shall be carried out at an appropriate time of year and a reptile report submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, including a mitigation strategy in the event that reptiles are found.
Reason: To protect reptiles and their habitats in accordance with Policy ENV16 of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007.
18. Prior to the commencement of development, reclamation of the site shall be carried out in accordance with RSK Environment Ltd’s report 25872/L01.SJ dated 9 th November 2012 unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. On completion of the reclamation works, the developer shall provide a verification report which confirms that the works have been completed in accordance with the approved documents and plans.
Reason: To ensure adequate protection of human health, the environment and watercourses in accordance with policies ENV20 of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007 and the National Planning Policy Framework.
19. Prior to the commencement of development, a scheme that includes the following components to deal with the risks associated with contamination of the site shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be implemented as approved unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority:
• A site investigation scheme based on the Phase 1 Environmental Risk Assessment HLEI17433/001R dated June 2011 to provide information for a detailed assessment of the risk to receptors that may be affected, including those off-site; • The results of the site investigation and detailed risk assessment referred to in (a) and based on these, an options appraisal and remediation strategy giving full details of the remediation measures required and how they are to be undertaken. • A verification plan providing details of the data that will be collected in order to demonstrate that the works set out in the remediation strategy in (b) are complete and identifying any requirements for longer-term monitoring of pollutant linkages, maintenance and arrangements for contingency action. Page 26 3/13/0551/FP
Reason: To protect groundwater in accordance with policy ENV20 of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007.
20. No infiltration of surface water drainage into the ground, or piling or other foundation designs using penetrative methods, is permitted other than with the express consent of the Local Planning Authority which may be given for those parts of the site where it has been demonstrated that there is no unacceptable risk to groundwater.
Reason: To protect groundwater in accordance with policy ENV20 of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007.
21. Prior to occupation of the development hereby approved, noise control measures shall be carried out in accordance with the submitted noise report 12274-R2 dated 28 th March 2013 unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
Reason: In the interests of the amenity of future residents in accordance with policy ENV25 of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007.
22. Development shall not begin until a detailed surface water drainage scheme based on the approved Flood Risk Assessment 120313 rev B dated 7 th June 2013 has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, and the scheme shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details and completed prior to first occupation. The scheme shall include a restriction in run-off to Greenfield rates and surface water storage on site as outline in the FRA.
Reason: To prevent the increased risk of flooding and to improve and protect water quality in accordance with policy ENV20 of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007.
Directives:
1. Other Legislation (01OL)
2. Highway Works (05FC)
3. Planning Obligation (08PO)
4. Street Naming and Numbering (19SN)
5. Groundwater protection zone (28GP – insert ‘Molewood’) Page 27 3/13/0551/FP
6. Unsuspected contamination (33UC)
7. Clearance of Vegetation (35CV)
8. In discharging the above conditions, the applicant is made aware of the advice set out in the Environment Agency’s letter dated 18 th July 2013.
Summary of Reasons for Decision
East Herts Council has considered the applicant’s proposal in a positive and proactive manner with regard to the policies of the Development Plan (Minerals Local Plan, Waste Core Strategy and Development Management Policies DPD 2012 and the ’saved’ policies of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007); the National Planning Policy Framework and in accordance with the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2012 (as amended). The balance of the considerations having regard to those policies, the pre-application advice given and amendments made is that permission should be granted.
(055113FP.HI)
1.0 Background:
1.1 The application site is shown on the attached OS extract and comprises former railway land that has previously been used in part as a waste transfer station and builders’ hire centre. The site currently lies vacant and overgrown.
1.2 To the south of the site lies the Grade II listed Hertford East Railway Station, to the north lies the former TXU site recently developed as flats and known as Elder Court, with two storey Victorian cottages adjacent, and to the west is the former Council depot site that has been developed as flats and known as The Waterfront. Land to the east also lies vacant and comprises former railway land. A small strip of land along the southern boundary of the site lies within the Hertford Conservation Area.
1.3 The application proposes a development of 130 units comprising of 52 no. 1 bed flats, 74 no. 2 bed flats and 4 no. 3 bed houses with associated amenity space and parking provision, and 40% affordable housing. A ground floor commercial unit of 100m2 is also proposed in the southwest corner of the site with delivery space on Mill Road. The application also proposes a new ‘link road’ to connect Mill Road and Mead Lane along with a bus lay-by to provide a transport interchange for Hertford East Railway Station, and a two space car club on Mill Page 28 3/13/0551/FP
Road. The density of the scheme is approximately 117 dwellings per hectare.
1.4 The scheme has been amended during the course of the application process following concerns initially raised by Officers regarding the scale, layout and design of the proposal, the amount and location of affordable housing units, amenity concerns for future occupiers regarding noise, overlooking and external amenity space, the level of parking provision and uncertainties surrounding a car club. In addition it was necessary to resolve an objection from the Environment Agency relating to drainage and flood risk. The scheme has since been reduced from 140 to 130 flats, the layout has been amended and the blocks have been reduced in height from a mix of 6, 5 and 4 storeys to a maximum of 4 storeys. Further information has been received with respect to the car club and parking provision, and a revised Flood Risk Assessment has been carried out. Statutory consultees and neighbours were therefore invited to comment on the amended documents.
1.5 There is further reference to policy matters below. By way of background however, the site forms part of an area identified in the draft Mead Lane Urban Design Framework for redevelopment for predominantly residential purposes.
2.0 Site History:
2.1 The northern part of the site was previously used as a waste transfer station and permission was granted in 2000 for a change of use of some additional former railway land to provide an additional storage area for skips (3/00/0142/CM). Permission was then granted by Herts County Council in 2010 for continued use of the site as a waste transfer station (3/10/0244/CM).
2.2 The mid part of the site was granted consent for a hire centre workshop in 1996 (3/96/0900/FP), and this is the only building remaining on site. In 1998 an outline application for a retail development of the entire site was submitted but withdrawn incomplete. No further submissions were made to redevelop the site. Conservation Area Consent has recently been granted to demolish the existing structures on site (3/13/0552/LC), although only a very small strip of land to the south of the site falls within the Conservation Area boundary.
3.0 Consultation Responses:
3.1 County Highways do not wish to restrict the grant of consent, subject to conditions and a legal agreement. They comment that the site is located Page 29 3/13/0551/FP
within a highly accessible and sustainable location and there are no road safety issues on the local road network. The application is supported by a Transport Assessment which shows that the immediate junctions will operate adequately and within their capacity limits. There are some vehicle queuing issues associated with the Ware Road/Mill Road signal junction, which are due to a number of factors, such as the operation of the A414 part-time signal controlled roundabout, the traffic along Ware Road and the traffic travelling to and from the large Tesco store. It should be noted, however, that the traffic from the proposed development is unlikely to have any material impact on this part of the road network.
3.2 They comment that there is limited off street parking within the development, and on-street parking control measures will be implemented along the link road. The Highway Authority has no objection to the proposed parking provision; however it is for the Local Planning Authority to consider, as the parking authority. Refuse collection will be from Mill Road, Mead Lane and the link road. The proposals incorporate the provision of a link road through the site which enables the Highway Authority with East Herts Council to develop a passenger transport strategy for the site, and also a new through route. This is consistent with the aspirations of the Hertford and Ware Urban Transport Plan.
3.3 The applicant is proposing to provide a 3m wide shared cycleway/footway along the eastern side of Mill Road and the southern side of the Link Road, and a 2m wide footway along the north side of the Link Road. The applicant is also proposing to provide a 3m wide bus lay-by suitable for accommodating two full size buses on the Link Road and the applicant will be establishing a Green Travel Plan to promote alternative modes of transport to and from the site, and the applicant is proposing to provide a car club. The Highway Authority is not seeking any financial contributions as part of this development as the applicant has agreed to provide a Link Road which establishes a through route to the benefit to the local highway network and at no cost to the Highway Authority.
3.4 In response to the amended plans, Highways comment that the 2 space car club would reduce the space available for deliveries on Mill Road which will increase the risk of larger vehicles extending beyond the length of the delivery area proposed for the commercial unit and encroaching on the new link road junction. They also comment that the bus layover facility should include a suitably specified bus shelter.
3.5 Herts County Council Planning Obligations Unit request fire hydrant Page 30 3/13/0551/FP
provision and the following financial contributions:
• £87,956 towards Primary Education; • £47,376 towards Secondary Education; • £17,878 towards Nursery Education; • £5,534 towards Childcare; • £1,212 towards Youth facilities; • £12,278 towards Library services.
3.6 The Housing Development Manager comments that the scheme proposes 52 affordable units which is in line with policy at 40% provision and the tenure mix is in line with the Council’s preferred 75% social rented and 25% shared ownership tenure split. Block B contains 39 affordable units which does not comply with the Council’s Affordable Housing Supplementary Planning Document on pepper-potting. Internally she would prefer to see a separate kitchen rather than open plan living for the 2 bed units, and would appreciate some wheelchair accessible units on the ground floor.
3.7 The Conservation Officer initially recommended refusal on the grounds that the mass, scale and design of the development would be out of keeping with the character and appearance of the Conservation Area. She now recommends consent and comments that the revised proposal is at a reduced height and loose courtyard layout resulting in a more comfortable addition to the setting of the adjacent Conservation Area, an approach which overcomes previous concerns regarding mass and scale within the immediate and wider Conservation Area. The style, detailing and decoration of the new development and visual character of the immediate and wider area is interpreted and reflected in a contemporary manner. Whilst it is acknowledged the introduction of a roofscape, as previously suggested would compromise the conscious design as proposed.
3.8 Furthermore it is noted that previous concerns regarding; “ the unit of houses ‘Fitzroy’, located on the eastern corner of the site is considered out of keeping with the architectural and historic context of the surrounding area.” have not been addressed. However due to constraints on this piece of land the orientation of the unit is fixed, the scale reflects the unit’s function as a focal point and the design has a relationship with the wider development whilst reflective of the detail of the historic character of the surrounding area. In summary the mass, scale and design of the proposed development, is considered in keeping with the character and appearance of the surrounding Conservation Area. Page 31 3/13/0551/FP
3.9 The Landscape Officer initially recommended refusal on the grounds of the height of the buildings and the limited sunlight to reach the enclosed courtyard gardens. He now recommends consent for the amended scheme and comments that there are some very positive elements to the landscape layout and proposals. The creation of a landscaped open space on the junction of Mill Road/Mead Lane provides visual amenity and softens the general appearance of the overall street scene. The tree, hedge and shrub planting found elsewhere in the street scenes along Mill Road and Mead Lane will also have similar effect. The proposed courtyard gardens are elegant landscape design solutions for the development. The visual impression is one of a designed layout which relates well to the overall geometry of the space(s) between building blocks and has the potential to make a pleasant and attractive open space. The quantity of amenity space provision also appears in reasonable proportion to the overall site when assessing the landscape master plan.
3.10 Environmental Health recommend refusal on the grounds that many of the proposed flats will be impacted upon by road traffic noise such that their double glazed windows will need to be installed as unopenable, which means that these flats will need to be ventilated mechanically. They recommend a number of conditions in the event of an approval.
3.11 Herts Biological Records Centre agree with the conclusions in the submitted Ecological Solutions report and recommend consent subject to conditions, including additional reptile surveys and the use of native species of trees and shrubs.
3.12 Natural England advises that from the information available, the proposal is unlikely to affect bats or great crested newts.
3.13 Herts and Middlesex Wildlife Trust comment that the site is not located on or adjacent to a Local Wildlife Site or nature conservation site. They agree with the conclusions of the consultant ecological report and recommend conditions to protect and enhance biodiversity. In response to the amended plans they make no further comment but welcome the inclusion of green roofs.
3.14 English Heritage comment that the application should be determined in accordance with national and local policy guidance, and on the basis of your specialist conservation advice. In relation to the amended plans they comment that the amendments are unlikely to have significantly different impacts on the natural environment than the original proposal.
3.15 The County Archaeologist comments that the site is in Area of Page 32 3/13/0551/FP
Archaeological Significance No. 172 which includes the historic core of the town of Hertford. No archaeological remains are known from the site that pre-date the 19 th century, though evidence of Saxon occupation and medieval and post-medieval activity is known from the vicinity, and particularly from sites excavated on the opposite side of Mill Road. Areas that have not been subjected to ground disturbance may retain the potential to contain archaeological remains. A condition to secure a programme of archaeological work is therefore recommended. In relation to the amended plans they have no additional comments to make.
3.16 The Environment Agency originally objected to the proposal due to the lack of an acceptable surface water flood risk assessment. Following the submission of additional information and an amended Flood Risk Assessment they have removed their objection and now recommend consent subject to conditions.
3.17 Affinity Water comments that the site is located within the groundwater Source Protection Zone of Molewood Pumping Station.
3.18 Thames Water raise no objection to the sewerage infrastructure and comment that proper provision of surface water drainage is the responsibility of the developer.
3.19 The Council Engineers comment that the amended proposals as identified in the revised Flood Risk Assessment and associated drawings show a green roof addition to the development. They consider that this represents a good quality SuDS solution combined as it is with the other SuDS elements at the site. As well as flood risk reduction characteristics, the green roof will provide and enhance amenity/biodiversity environmental improvements and additionally assist with pollution.
3.20 Hertfordshire Constabulary are satisfied with the amended plans and suggest that should the development be granted that it is conditioned to achieve full Secured by Design accreditation.
3.21 The County Minerals and Waste Team comment that regard should be had to relevant policies of the Herts County Council Waste Core Strategy and Development Management Policies Development Plan Document 2012 that promote the sustainable management of waste including encouraging the re-use of unavoidable waste where possible, and the use of recycled materials where appropriate to the construction.
Page 33 3/13/0551/FP
4.0 Town Council Representations:
4.1 Hertford Town Council expressed concern to the initial plans regarding the impact and effect such a development would have on the Victorian properties on Mead Lane. In recent years the Council had been keen to protect the environment of the residents in the original homes on Mead Lane, Marshgate Drive and Spencer Street. The Committee supported the road traffic proposals if they were to have the effect of a clockwise, one way system of traffic management, which it was felt would be to the benefit of the residents. Concern was expressed however regarding speeding traffic on a one way system.
4.2 In response to the amended plans, the Town Council continues to fear that a 4 storey development directly opposite the Victorian cottages would damage the amenity of these important buildings. They remain opposed to any development at the site until the Mead Lane access and egress issues are resolved.
5.0 Other Representations:
5.1 The application has been advertised by way of press notice, site notice and neighbour notification.
5.2 11 no. letters of representation were received in response to the original submission, including Hertford Civic Society and a local action group Transition Hertford, which can be summarised as follows:
• Loss of light and overbearing to neighbouring properties; • Insufficient parking provision and road congestion; • Traffic problems would make access difficult for existing disabled residents and place vulnerable people at greater risk; • Overdevelopment of the site – scale of development is disproportionate; • Too many flats in the area – the most densely populated area in town; • Further pressure on local school places; • Increase in locally reported crime and anti-social behaviour; • The site was cleared and all the trees removed; • The Car Club will not work – the developers of Elder Court failed; • The new access road will do nothing to address access problems; • Lack of information on the purpose or viability of the commercial unit; • Contrast in design with the two existing large developments; • Design appears monolithic; Page 34 3/13/0551/FP
• Query whether there will be a pedestrian access to the north of Hertford East Station; • Query over traffic calming measures and suggestion for speed bumps in Mead Lane; • Concern over vibration damage to neighbouring properties; • Bus interchange would be better located on Mill Road opposite the existing bus stop with pedestrians given priority to the station; • Separate routes should be provided for pedestrians and cyclists; • The proposal misses opportunities to have a positive impact on biodiversity; • Poor layout of Block B and overlooking between dwellings; • The quality of external and internal spaces should not distinguish between market and affordable housing; • Proposal should achieve Code for Sustainable Homes level 4 as set out in the Mead Lane Urban Design Framework; • It is unclear from the documents how the traffic would flow, but appears to create flats surrounded by busy roads carrying industrial traffic; • Impact on setting of Hertford East Railway Station.
5.3 4 additional letters have been received in response to the amended plans raising concerns over inadequate parking despite a reduction in units, concern over traffic movements during peak hours, an overdevelopment of the area, and anti-social behaviour from affordable housing.
6.0 Policy:
6.1 The relevant saved Local Plan policies in this application include the following:
SD1 Making Development More Sustainable SD2 Settlement Hierarchy HSG1 Assessment of Sites not Allocated in this Plan HSG3 Affordable Housing HSG4 Affordable Housing Criteria HSG6 Lifetime Homes TR1 Traffic Reduction in New Developments TR2 Access to New Developments TR3 Transport Assessments TR4 Travel Plans TR7 Car Parking – Standards TR12 Cycle Routes – New Developments TR13 Cycling – Facilities Provision (Non-Residential) Page 35 3/13/0551/FP
TR14 Cycling – Facilities Provision (Residential) EDE2 Loss of Employment Sites STC1 Development in Town Centres and Edge-of-Centre ENV1 Design and Environmental Quality ENV2 Landscaping ENV3 Planning Out Crime – New Development ENV14 Local Sites ENV16 Protected Species ENV20 Groundwater Protection ENV21 Surface Water Drainage ENV25 Noise Sensitive Development BH1 Archaeology and New Development BH2 Archaeological Evaluations and Assessments BH3 Archaeological Conditions and Agreements BH6 New Developments in Conservation Areas LRC3 Recreational Requirements in New Residential Developments
6.2 The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) is also a material consideration in determining this application, along with the Hertford and Ware Urban Transport Plan and the draft Mead Lane Urban Design Framework.
7.0 Considerations:
Principle of Development
7.1 The site lies within the built-up area of Hertford wherein there is no objection in principle to new residential or commercial developments. The site is a brownfield site that has been identified for a comprehensive redevelopment through the draft Mead Lane Urban Design Framework. This draft policy document went through public consultation in 2011 and is intended to be formally adopted as a Supplementary Planning Document (SPD); however, this process has been delayed due to resources required for the District Plan. The framework therefore remains in draft form and only limited weight can be assigned to it in the determination of this application. It sets out a vision for the redevelopment of this part of town which has struggled to realise its full potential, mainly due to restricted vehicular access issues, and has the opportunity to create a mixed use environment for the town.
7.2 The Urban Design Framework anticipates that development of this site will be predominantly residential with potential opportunities for a range of other commercial uses. It states that the built form should provide a perimeter block of higher density and result in a clear street structure Page 36 3/13/0551/FP
with connection to and overlooking of walking routes. Building heights are expected to vary from generally two and a half storeys to three and a half storeys, and corner locations should provide a focus for longer views so should show attention to detailed design. Public frontages and elevations should reflect themes within the site surroundings and be attractively proportioned and interesting. Main roads should be designed with a strong landscaped structure, as ‘green streets’ of high amenity. The Framework also proposes a pedestrian/cycle link between Hertford East Station and the National Cycle Route 61 at Hartham Common.
7.3 The site is located in close proximity to public transport connections, town centre services and recreational open space, and is therefore deemed to be a sustainable location for development. Redevelopment of this brownfield site is therefore supported in principle through the NPPF and will also make a meaningful contribution towards the Council’s housing land supply. The site has not been included in the latest housing land supply calculations (as detailed in the 2011/2012 Annual Monitoring Report) as it was not anticipated to come forward within a 5 year period. These considerations should be given significant weight in the determination of the application.
7.4 There is an additional strip of land to the south of the site that remains in the ownership of Network Rail and does not form part of this application. Officers were keen during pre-application discussions for this plot of land to be included within the proposals in order to facilitate a comprehensive redevelopment of the site. However, negotiations with Network Rail have proved unsuccessful and this strip of land therefore remains outside the application proposals. An indicative layout plan has been submitted to indicate a potential future development of this land but does not form part of the planning application. On the basis of this indicative drawing, Officers are satisfied that the proposed development would still enable some modest development of this land for commercial opportunities.
Loss of Employment Site
7.5 The site was previously occupied by employment uses including a plant hire depot and waste transfer station. Policy EDE2 states that development that would cause the loss of a site that was last in employment use will only be permitted if the retention of the site for employment use has been fully explored without success. In this case Officers have not been presented with any evidence that the site cannot be retained for employment purposes, and only limited commercial floorspace is proposed as part of the application. However, it is Page 37 3/13/0551/FP
acknowledged that the previous employment use of the site was only modest in scale and the loss of employment, and weight that should be assigned to it, is therefore not considered to be significant in this case.
7.6 Regard is also had to the draft Mead Lane Urban Design Framework which identifies the site for predominantly residential development, with potential for other commercial uses such as retail, restaurant uses and a hotel opposite Hertford East Railway Station. The opportunity for a hotel on the site was encouraged by Officers during pre-application discussions, but the applicant claimed there was no such interest. Although Officers have not been presented with any marketing evidence to confirm these claims, it is acknowledged that the site is identified for a predominantly residential use and it is not considered that the loss of this site for predominantly employment purposes would compromise the economic vitality of the town in accordance with the NPPF given that significant allocated employment areas remain to the east of the site.
7.7 A small commercial unit is proposed on the ground floor in the southwest corner of the site fronting the railway station and Mill Road. This will provide an active frontage and serve as a benefit to local residents and workers. On balance, Officers are however satisfied that although the proposal is technically in conflict with the requirements of policy EDE2 and falls short of the objectives of the Urban Design Framework, there are overriding material considerations to justify a loss of employment in this case.
7.8 The commercial unit is proposed for retail purposes and will provide a service to local residents and users of the railway station. Policy STC1 states that the preferred location for new retail development is in the town centre, followed by edge-of-centre sites in line with the sequential approach. Such developments will only be permitted where the proposal is consistent with the character and role of the town centre, is accessible by a choice of transport, will provide for effective use of the upper floors, and parking, access and traffic generation are satisfactory. In this case the proposed unit is small and is considered to be located in an edge-of-centre location where it will have no harmful impact on the vitality or viability of the town centre. It is well located in relation to public transport services and will have residential on the floors above. A number of local residents have questioned the need and justification for this retail unit, particularly given the proximity of the site to Tesco, located approximately 120m to the south of the site. However, the need for a mixed use redevelopment of the site and the retention of an element of employment use has been justified above.
7.9 Officers consider that it would also be suitable for this commercial unit Page 38 3/13/0551/FP
to be used for A2 (financial and professional services) or A3 (restaurants and cafes) purposes, and that a more flexible approach is consistent with the aims of the NPPF in supporting economic vitality. Alternative uses may have the potential to impact on residential amenity and it is therefore considered reasonable and necessary to restrict the use of this unit for A1, A2 or A3 purposes only.
Highways and Parking Provision
7.10 The application proposes a new link road between Mead Lane and Mill Road, just to the north of Hertford East Station, along with the provision of a bus lay-by to provide a transport interchange. The need for the link road was set out in the Hertford and Ware Urban Transport Plan - November 2010) and followed the carrying out of a Mead Lane Access Master Plan Study with the aim of seeking to remove HGV traffic associated with Mead Lane from the residential areas, to provide an additional route for emergency vehicles into the Mead Lane area, and enable improved circulation for buses. Although Mead Lane and the northern part of Mill Road are not currently served by a bus route, the link road and bus lay-by will provide a layover point for the local bus routes. The link road is also advocated in the Mead Lane Urban Design Framework and has been encouraged through pre-application discussions with Planning and Highways Officers.
7.11 The link road is proposed to carry two-way traffic and is not proposed as a one-way system as suggested by the Town Council. However, it is likely that traffic exiting the Mead Lane area will use this link road, whilst traffic entering Mead Lane is likely to continue to use the existing road layout, enabling a circular movement. A bus-only right turn is proposed from Mead Lane at the north eastern junction of the link road. Overall County Highways welcome the delivery of the link road and support the proposed changes to the highway network and Officers consider this to weigh in favour of the scheme.
7.12 The development proposes various other highway works, including the provision of a 2m wide footway on the northern side of the link road, a 3m wide cycle/footway on the southern side with a 3m wide bus lay-by for two buses, a 3m wide shared cycle/footway on the eastern side of Mill Road adjacent to the application site, a pedestrian connection from Mead Lane to the new bus stop, and narrowing of Mill Lane adjacent to the site to 7.3m. Double yellow lines will be provided along the link road to prevent parking. These improvement works have been agreed with County Highways and are considered to be acceptable and in accordance with the Hertford and Ware Urban Transport Plan, and the Mead Lane Urban Design Framework. It is recommended that these Page 39 3/13/0551/FP
highway improvement works are secured through a S106 legal agreement. Highways have also requested that a bus shelter be provided at the bus lay-by transport interchange.
7.13 The application is supported by a Transport Assessment which shows that the immediate junctions within the vicinity of the site will operate adequately and within their capacity limits. County Highways acknowledge that there are some queuing issues associated with the Ware Road/Mill Road signal junction that are due to a number of factors such as the operation of the A414 part-time signal controlled roundabout, the traffic along Ware Road, and traffic travelling to and from Tesco. However, they comment that traffic from the proposed development is unlikely to have a material impact on this part of the road network.
7.14 In terms of parking, a total of 94 parking spaces are proposed across the site, including 47 undercroft spaces at Block A, 35 parking bays for Block B, 8 spaces for the terrace of 3 bed dwellings, and 4 subsidiary parking spaces to the front of the terrace. This represents a total parking ratio of 0.72 spaces per dwelling. The original submission for 140 units also proposed 94 parking spaces and therefore given the reduction in unit numbers, the amended scheme has increased the parking ratio from 0.67 to 0.72 spaces per dwelling.
7.15 The Council’s adopted maximum parking standards for this proposed development would amount to 185 spaces (including a maximum of 3 spaces for the retail unit). The proposed provision is therefore low in relation to the maximum standards; however it is important to have regard to the sustainable location of the site in relation to Hertford East Railway Station and town centre services and facilities, and the proposed two space car club. No parking is proposed for the retail unit, but this is considered to be acceptable given the sustainable location of the site.
7.16 However, the parking provision of 94 spaces compared to a maximum of 185 spaces, with a ratio of only 0.72 spaces per dwelling, is considered to be low. Based on the layout of the parking provision on site (and excluding the parking associated with the terraced dwellings and subsidiary spaces), and assuming that only one space would be allocated for each flat with parking, there would be 44 flats without any allocated parking provision. It is acknowledged that there is no on-street parking in the vicinity of the site, apart from Spencer Street which is at capacity, and new residents would not be eligible to apply for parking permits for the existing resident parking scheme. However, it is still considered that the proposal would result in some overspill and place Page 40 3/13/0551/FP
even greater pressure on roads without parking restrictions. The Urban Transport Plan also acknowledges limited parking capacity at the station and that overflow parking is known to impact on surrounding streets.
7.17 Regard is also had to neighbouring residential developments, including The Waterfront development to the west of the site which was approved with 1.0 parking spaces per unit, and the Elder Court development to the north which has been constructed with a 0.95 parking ratio (including a new 12 space car park approved under reference 3/11/0217/FP). Elder Court was previously subject to an appeal regarding its parking provision as Members refused consent in 2007 for removal of a sub-basement parking area which would have resulted in a 0.87 parking ratio (reference 3/07/1546/FO). In assessing this appeal, the Inspector had regard to the parking pressures in the vicinity of the site but allowed the appeal subject to the developer providing a 2 space car club. Given that the parking ratio proposed in this application is materially lower that this 0.87 ratio, and given the issues discussed above, Officers consider the provision of a car club to be necessary in this case in order to mitigate against low parking provision.
7.18 The developer has contacted five car club operators, of which two were interested in the site, and they now propose a firm commitment to provide a two space car club with Hertz on Demand. The two car club spaces would be located on Mill Road, in close proximity to the bus interchange and the railway station. Highways have raised concerns over the proximity of the car club spaces to the commercial delivery space and the link road junction. The siting of the car club spaces should therefore be controlled through the legal agreement.
7.19 The car club is proposed to be accessible to both residents of the new development as well as existing local residents and workers. The provision of a car club in the Mead Lane area has been advocated through the Hertford and Ware Urban Transport Plan and the Mead Lane Urban Design Framework and has therefore been encouraged through discussions with the applicant. Officers now welcome the firm commitment from the developers and recommend that this be secured through a legal agreement.
7.20 Members may recall that an application to remove the legal requirement for the Elder Court car club was approved in January 2012 (reference 3/11/0236/SV). This was because the developer had failed to secure a car club operator, and the requirement proved to be unviable. Due to a lack of action by the developer the development had become almost entirely occupied with no car club provision and Officers were therefore Page 41 3/13/0551/FP
able to assess that the 0.87 parking ratio was not resulting in any significant parking issues. Further, an application was made concurrently for an additional 12 space car park to the rear of the site (3/11/0217/FP), raising the parking ratio to 0.95, and this was granted consent subject to a financial contribution of £4,000 (index linked) to go towards future car club provision in the Mead Lane area, or other sustainable transport measures. Officers have requested that this contribution be made available to ensure that this current proposal is successful as the car club is proposed not only to serve the future residents, but also the existing residents and local workers.
7.21 In terms of cycle provision, 139 cycling parking spaces are proposed to serve the 126 flats which is in excess of the Council’s cycle parking standards. These spaces are proposed in secure covered areas and therefore comply with Local Plan policy TR14. 3 no. cycle parking spaces are also proposed to serve the commercial unit and are conveniently located to the front of the building in accordance with policy TR13. The proposal also makes provision for enhancements to cycle connections along Mill Road and the link road.
7.22 An initial Green Travel Plan has also been submitted in order to inform future residents of the development about local transport infrastructure and sustainable travel choices. This will include maps of local walking and cycling routes, public transport services, the car club, and measures to promote car sharing. Full details of this Travel Plan should be secured through planning condition in order to promote alternative sustainable modes of transport.
7.23 The Hertford and Ware Urban Transport Plan also sets out a requirement for enhancements to the station frontage, including improvements to pedestrian and cycle access. This application does not make any provision for such enhancements, nor do they offer any contribution. However, Officers are satisfied that the proposal incorporates sufficient sustainable transport provision and enhancement through the new link road and associated highway works without requiring any further provision. County Highways have not requested any further financial contributions to mitigate against the impact of the development, and Officers do not consider that further contributions for off-site enhancements meet the tests set out in Regulation 122 of the Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010.
Scale and Design
7.24 The scheme is proposed to take the form of two clusters of blocks around central amenity land with surface car parking in-between, along Page 42 3/13/0551/FP
with a terrace of 4 units located at the eastern end of the site. Blocks A1, A2, A3 and A4 to the west of the site will house the market accommodation and have been designed with ground floor parking beneath a raised first floor amenity deck. Blocks B1, B2 and B3 to the east of the site have been designed around a ground level courtyard amenity area with surface car parking located in the centre of the site.
7.25 The buildings are proposed to be set back from existing street frontages, with new planting proposed to improve the quality of the street scene. A pocket park is proposed in the northwest corner of the site, at the junction of Mill Road and Mead Lane, and opposite the entrance to the river and Hartham Common. This will make a positive contribution to the character and appearance of the area and create a more welcoming entrance to the town from the river, and a much improved approach to the railway station.
7.26 The overall layout of the site has been improved following discussions with Officers – the blocks have been reduced in size and set back further from the street providing for an enhanced street frontage. The development now appears more spacious, and subject to details of a good quality landscaping scheme, is considered to be acceptable and in accordance with Local Plan policy ENV1. Although the central car parking area is large, a good quality landscaping design will break up the visual impact of the hard-surfacing.
7.27 The height of the buildings has also been reduced following discussions with Officers. The blocks were initially proposed to be a mix of 4 and 5 storeys with 6 storeys high on Blocks A2, A3 and A5. Officers considered that although there was some potential for higher buildings in the northwest corner facing the entrance to Hartham, 6 storeys was considered to be excessive. Concerns were also raised over the height of the block fronting the modest two storey Victorian cottages on Mead lane.
7.28 The development is now proposed to be no more than 4 storeys in height, and Block B3 opposite the cottages has been reduced to three storeys with a pitched roof to provide some interest in the roofscape. The Mead lane Urban Design Framework suggests that building heights will vary from generally two and a half storeys to three and a half storeys in this area. Although the heights exceed this expectation and lack in variation, Officers consider the visual impact to be acceptable and note that the framework also states that “higher density forms will appropriately locate to the western end of Mead Lane on site which are more accessible to Hertford East Station and the town centre.”
Page 43 3/13/0551/FP
7.29 The application also proposes a terrace of 4 no. 4 bed three storey dwellings to be located at the eastern end of the site. The building has been designed to face the Link Road with frontage parking, and rear gardens backing onto railway land to the rear. Officers were initially concerned over the layout and design of this terrace but no amendments have been made to this aspect of the scheme due to other constraints including a gas pipeline running across the front of the site. The building will appear grand and formal in design, but will provide a focal point when approaching down the new link road. Although the three storeys may appears large in relation to the two storey cottages opposite, it will appear in-keeping in scale with the development proposed and given its siting will not appear unduly prominent in the street. Officers therefore consider that although this aspect of the proposal could be improved, it is not harmful in scale or design.
7.30 The Conservation Officer is now satisfied that the amended plans provide for a satisfactory form of development that will respect the character and appearance of the Hertford Conservation Area and the setting of nearby listed buildings. Although the external appearance of the buildings appears somewhat repetitive, it is considered that the design is of a high quality, and the loose courtyard layout results in a more comfortable addition to the Conservation Area. Samples of materials of construction will be required to ensure a high quality development.
7.31 Officers had previously raised concerns over the lack of a roofscape in the design of the scheme, and only a small section of pitched roof is now proposed in the northeast corner of the site. However, the Conservation Officer considers that the introduction of a roofscape would now compromise the design of the amended scheme. And it is also noted that a number of the flat roofs are proposed as green roofs to provide for sustainable urban drainage.
7.32 In terms of crime prevention, Hertfordshire Constabulary have commented that the amended plans now make provision for Secured by Design requirements, and they support the proposal subject to a condition that the development achieve full SBD accreditation. Officers acknowledge the crime prevention measures incorporated into the proposal and consider this to comply with policy ENV3. However it is not considered reasonable, having regard to Circular 11/95, to require that the scheme achieves full SBD accreditation.
Sustainability
7.33 The site is in a sustainable location in close proximity to local services, Page 44 3/13/0551/FP
facilities and employment opportunities. A sustainability Statement has been submitted with the application which sets out the sustainable principles in the design and layout of the site. It is also proposed to incorporate Sustainable Urban Drainage systems (SuDS), including green roofs and permeable paving. Officers therefore consider the proposal to amount to a sustainable form of development in accordance with Local Plan policies SD1 and ENV1.
7.34 Officers note that the Mead Lane Urban Design Framework expects new developments in the Mead Lane area to achieve Code for Sustainable Homes level 4 and a Building for Life Code of 14 points or above. However, given that this document has not been formally adopted and there is no further policy support for such specific sustainability requirements, Officers do not consider these requirements to be reasonable in this case in accordance with Circular 11/95 and the Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010. Nonetheless, as a result of requirements applied by the registered providers, it will be necessary for the affordable units to meet Code for Sustainable Homes Level 4.
Noise
7.35 An Environmental Noise Survey has been carried out by the applicant in order to assess the impact of existing noise and vibration sources on the proposed development, and to determine the most appropriate acoustic treatment. The report concludes that vibration levels would not be unacceptable, and the Environmental Health Officer is satisfied with this conclusion.
7.36 In terms of noise, the report concludes that appropriate glazing can be provided to ensure that minimum reasonable internal ambient noise levels are met (based on British Standard 8233). However, in order to achieve these satisfactory internal noise levels, a number of habitable room windows fronting Mead Lane, Mill Road and the Link Road would have to remain closed, and the report therefore recommends the use of mechanical ventilation.
7.37 Whilst the use of mechanical ventilation would address the issue of noise disturbance and provide for an appropriate level of internal noise insulation, the use of mechanical ventilation can have an impact on the amenity of future occupiers. Environmental Health have therefore recommended refusal of the application for this reason, commenting that a number of habitable room windows would need to be installed as unopenable.
Page 45 3/13/0551/FP
7.38 However, Officers note that the windows would be installed as openable, but will be supported by mechanical ventilation so that residents have a choice in terms of ventilation. This is considered to be a reasonable approach in this situation.
7.39 Whilst having regard to this recommendation for refusal, Officers also note that there have not been any noise complaints from the existing residential developments fronting Mill Road or Mead Lane, and that this was not raised as an issue in determining these previous applications. Officers also note that much of the noise disturbance is related to day- time commercial traffic movements in connection with the Mead Lane Employment Area. Noise disturbance at night would therefore be less significant. Finally, it is noted that the noise surveys were carried out on the current road layout and do not take account of the proposed link road which will be expected to re-distribute traffic movements. Officers therefore do not consider this issue to justify refusal of the application.
7.40 Also acknowledged is the impact that the proposals will have with regard to generating noise on the site, particularly during the construction phase. Of course, whilst it can be intrusive, construction phase noise is ultimately transient.
Affordable Housing
7.41 The proposal makes provision for 52 of the 130 units to be affordable, which represents an exact 40% provision in accordance with Local Plan policy HSG3. The affordable units comprise 26 no. 1 bed flats and 26 no.2 bed flats which is considered to be acceptable subject to a tenure mix of 75% social rented and 25% shared ownership to be secured through a legal agreement.
7.42 The affordable units are predominantly to be located in Blocks B1, B2 and B3 to the east of the site, with 12 no. shared ownership flats proposed in Block A4 towards the centre of the site. The Council’s Affordable Housing SPD requires that on sites incorporating 30 or more residential units, affordable units should be provided in groups of no more than 15% of the total number of units or 25 affordable units, whichever is the lesser. In this case, 77% of the affordable units are proposed in a single cluster in Blocks B1, B2 and B3 and the proposal therefore fails to comply with the SPD which seeks to achieve mixed, inclusive and sustainable communities.
7.43 Officers are also concerned that the layout of the site has been designed to differentiate between the market and affordable units. The market housing area in Block A has been designed with ground floor Page 46 3/13/0551/FP
parking provision and a raised amenity deck, whilst the affordable housing in Blocks B has been designed with surface parking located to the west of the blocks, and a smaller ground level amenity courtyard.
7.44 The Council’s Housing Development Manager has raised similar concerns and Officers therefore consider the layout and design of the affordable housing element of the proposal to be contrary to adopted policy and to weigh negatively in the overall balance of considerations. The developer has indicated that it is preferable in management terms for the affordable housing to be provided in one area, and that the cost and design of the raised amenity deck could not be justified for the affordable housing; however these reasons are not considered to outweigh the policy requirements.
7.45 In terms of Lifetime Homes, the development proposes 100% provision, which far exceeds the 15% requirement set out in Policy HSG6 and this weighs in favour of the proposal. Other comments raised by the Housing Development Manager, such an internal layouts and the provision of lifts, are noted but are not considered to be in conflict with planning policy requirements.
Heritage Assets
7.46 The site lies just to the north of the Hertford Conservation Area with a small section of the south of the site falling within the boundary. The proposal therefore has the potential to impact on the setting of the Conservation Area. The Conservation Officer had recommended refusal of the initial scheme, but is now satisfied that the amended scheme better respects the character and appearance of the Conservation Area.
7.47 There are a number of listed buildings located to the south of the site including the Grade II listed Hertford East Railway Station, the former Dolphin public House, Bluecoats further south, and a signal box located to the east of the site. Given the acceptable scale, form and design of the proposal and the distances retained between buildings, the Conservation Officer is satisfied that the proposal will not result in any harm to the setting of these listed buildings in accordance with Section 12 of the NPPF.
7.48 The site also lies within an Area of Archaeological Significance which includes the historic core of Hertford town. An Archaeological Desk Based Assessment has been submitted, and this concludes that past ground disturbance has been significant due to previous rail activities; however there is a moderate potential for Anglo-Saxon remains and low potential for all other past periods of human activity. The County Page 47 3/13/0551/FP
Archaeologist has commented that the proposal is likely to have an impact on remains of archaeological interest, particularly given known archaeological remains from adjoining development sites. A condition is therefore recommended to secure a programme of archaeological work in accordance with Local Plan policies BH1, BH2 and BH3, and the NPPF.
Residential Amenity
7.49 Given the location of the site and distances retained to neighbouring properties, Officers are satisfied that the proposal will not result in undue harm by way of loss of light or overlooking. The overall height of the units is now considered to be acceptable, and the reduced height opposite the two storey Victorian cottages on Mead Lane is now considered acceptable to mitigate against any significant harm. The anticipated dissipation of heavy goods vehicle movements may also improve the amenity for existing neighbouring residents.
7.50 In terms of the amenity of future occupiers, it is considered that the internal accommodation proposed would provide for an adequate level of amenity. And externally, sufficient space is proposed as amenity green space. Officers initially raised concerns that the layout and design of the Block B courtyard was too enclosed and would unduly restrict daylight. The amended scheme has widened the gap between Blocks B1 and B3 to allow for increased daylight and improved amenity. Officers now consider this issue to have been addressed.
7.51 The units have also been re-designed to minimise overlooking between the flats. Although a number of balconies and terraces are proposed, Officers are satisfied that adequate boundary screening can be secured by condition to prevent any undue harm.
Ecology
7.52 An ecological report has been submitted with the application which concludes that the proposal will not result in any harm to protected species. Surveys were carried out in 2011, and again in August 2012. There is an existing building on site which is considered to be unsuitable for use by bats, and there are no trees on site to support roosting bats. The surveys found some evidence of foraging and commuting bat activity, but HBRC, Natural England and the Wildlife Trust have confirmed that no harm would arise to these protected species.
7.53 In terms of nesting birds, the existing scrub habitat offers a suitable Page 48 3/13/0551/FP
habitat for a range of bird species; it would therefore be necessary for site clearance to take place outside of the bird breeding season (i.e. during October-February inclusive) and this could be controlled by directive. Finally, the initial 2011 survey had recorded a solitary juvenile Slow Worm on the southern boundary of the site; however no evidence was found in the latest survey. Nonetheless HBRC recommend that further reptile surveys be carried out prior to the commencement of development, and appropriate mitigation measures implemented. Officers are satisfied that this can be adequately controlled by condition.
7.54 Finally, there are no statutory or non-statutory designated sites of nature conservation value within close proximity of the site. The closest is the River Beane and River Lea Confluence Wildlife Site located some 300m to the north with intervening development and waterways to ensure protection. Officers are therefore satisfied that the proposed development will result in no harm to any protected sites or species in accordance with policies ENV14 and ENV16.
Flood Risk and Drainage
7.55 The site lies in floodzone 1 wherein there is a low risk of flooding to people and property. However, the development must also make provision for adequate drainage provision in order to prevent any future flooding. The proposal will result in a net increase in the impermeable surface on site, and this could result in surface water flooding in the future. The Environment Agency (EA) objected to the original proposals on the grounds that the submitted Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) failed to demonstrate that sustainable drainage solutions have been incorporated into the scheme.
7.56 The applicant has since confirmed that the proposed amenity deck to Block A will serve as a large sustainable drainage facility, and green roofs are proposed to Blocks A1 and A2. A revised FRA and drainage proposals have been submitted which the Environment Agency are now satisfied with and recommend approval subject to conditions. The proposal is therefore considered to comply with Local Plan policy ENV21 and the NPPF.
7.57 In respect of foul drainage, there is an existing adopted sewer located in Mill Road, and Thames Water have raised no objection to the development.
7.58 In terms of land contamination, initial investigations have been carried out and conclude that remedial works will be required due to the former use of the land as a railway depot. The Environmental Health Officer Page 49 3/13/0551/FP
has confirmed acceptability of this report subject to a condition requiring reclamation to be carried out in accordance with the report, and the presence of any significant unsuspected contamination being brought to the attention of the Local Planning Authority.
Planning Obligations
7.59 Herts County Council have requested standard financial contributions related to Primary, Secondary and Nursery Education, Childcare facilities, Youth facilities, and Libraries. These are considered to be necessary and justified in accordance with the CIL Regulations 2010. No further contributions have been requested by County Highways or are considered to be justified in this case.
7.60 Contributions will also be required towards outdoor sport and recreation facilities (£85,506.45), and children’s play facilities (£8,221.56) given that the proposal is predominantly residential and will result in increased pressure on existing facilities, in particular Hartham Common and the leisure centre which are in close proximity to the site. In terms of children’s play facilities, it is acknowledged that the proposal includes a number of 1 bed flats which are unlikely to accommodate children. This contribution figure has therefore been calculated only the basis of the number of 2 and 4 bed units. These requirements are as set out in the Council’s Open Space, Sport and Recreation SPD and are also considered to comply with the CIL Regulations.
8.0 Conclusion:
8.1 Overall the redevelopment of this derelict brownfield site for predominantly residential purposes is considered to be acceptable in principle, and will enhance the character and appearance of this part of Mead Lane in accordance with the draft Mead Lane Urban Design Framework. The proposals should be considered in the context of the presumption in favour of sustainable development contained within the NPPF. In that respect officers consider that significant weight should be attached to the benefits of the scheme with regard to housing provision and more particularly that it still achieves the Councils policy aspirations that 40% of units are provided as affordable units.
8.2 The application includes provision of a new link road to mitigate vehicular movements in the Mead Lane area. This link road has been advocated in the Hertford and Ware Urban Transport Plan and the draft Mead Lane Urban Design Framework and its delivery is fully supported as it will benefit vehicular movements in the area as a whole. This weighs positively in the balance of considerations. Cycle provision is Page 50 3/13/0551/FP
provided between the rail station at Hertford East and toward Hartham Common to the north, again an aspiration articulated in the Design Framework.
8.3 The proposals include a requirement for the provision of a car-club, a further element of the scheme that supports and draws on the sustainable location of this development. This would be available to residents more widely and therefore provides a potential benefit beyond the confines of the site.
8.4 Lastly, whilst not significant in terms of its overall floorspace, a commercial unit is to be provided as part of the development. Again, this has the potential to provide an enhanced level of amenity for both the potential new occupiers and those existing in the wider area.
8.5 The scheme has been amended following discussions with Officers to propose a scheme of reduced height, mass and scale, and the layout has been amended to provide a more spacious form of development. Although the design could be improved through greater variation in roof forms, Officers consider that this would not result in a particularly harmful impact and that the overall layout and design of the site is acceptable. There would be no harm to the setting of the Hertford Conservation Area and the nearby listed buildings.
8.6 There are some elements of the proposal to which it is considered that negative weight can be assigned. Whilst the proposal makes provision for 40% affordable housing and 100% lifetime homes, the layout of the affordable housing has not been amended following discussions with Officers and still provides a cluster of affordable housing in Block B contrary to the requirements of the Council’s Affordable Housing SPD. Parking provision is limited and the amenity afforded to residents in the new development is likely to be impacted upon by locally generated noise.
8.7 Overall then there is a balance to be struck between the harmful and beneficial impacts of the development. Clearly, the currently unused nature of the site and land should not lead to a development proposal being supported regardless. However, given the strong presumption in the NPPF, the circumstances of the Council in relation to land supply for housing and the indisputable sustainable credentials of this site in location terms, it is considered that the balance falls in favour of the proposals. They are therefore, recommended to be approved subject to the legal agreement requirements and conditions.
Page 51 This page is intentionally left blank
Page 52 c
8
Works
4 2
Dicker
7 2 Mill
7 1
Marshgate Trading Estate 5 2
5
Works 2
14 8
13
12
1 1 to SITE 10
9 ilillilll to ilillilll M M iMi i Hertford and Ware 6 r rM rM M kkekere r r icickickekee DDiDcicic Sea Cadets DDD
E E E E E E VEVEVE 5 I I I 2 V V V o I V I V I V t 1 RI RI RI 4 R R R DRDRDR D D D D D D E E E
E E E
T T T 2 E E E
T T T 5 ATATAT A A A GAGAGA G G G HGHGHG H H H 3 SHSHSH o S S S
t R SR SR S
7 R R R 1 ARARAR ESS 6 2 A A A MAMAMA M M M M M M
E 2 l Dicker S u b Depot House S
ta
1 Club 3
9 1 T T T T T T ETETET E E E EEEEEE E E E RERERE R R R TRTRTR T T T STSTST S S S S S S R R R
R R R
ERERER E E E 1 CECECE C C C NCNCNC N N N ENENEN E E E PEPEPE P P P SPSPSP S S S
S S S 1
9
Elder Court 1 E 3 MMME MMME o MMM t
1
M M M 1 7
66118to 7 M M M 1
MI MI MI 3
L L L 9
I I I L L L t
I LI LI L
o L L L t L L L o
L L L
R R R 1
R R R 1
RORORO 0
O O O 2 5
OAOAOA 8 A A A ADADAD D D D
D D D
1
3 0 1 1 13
3 5 B S t o
8 5 12 to 1 86 t ron terf Wa The
El Sub Sta
The Waterfront
C C C C C C CRCRCR R R R RORORO O O O 7 OSOSOS 7 S S S to SISISI 4 IEIEIE 7 IEIEIE
ERERER
R R R
R R R 1 8 3
P P P 1
P P P
PLPLPL t 1
L L L o 2 0 6 3 LALALA 1 A A A ACACAC 3 C C C 4
CECECE
E E E
4 1 E E E 3 2 1 3
4 8
1
3 EETETT
EEEEETETT 1 2 EEE 8
TTRTREREE
S S TSTRTRR 1
TTT 1
YY YS S S 2 6
rt S S S 1
u AAYAYY 8
AAYAYY 1 o WWW 3 AAA 0
C ILILIWLWW
's AAIALILIL 5
AAIAI I 1 n RRR 2 3 h 4 Jo RRARAA St
M M M M M M MI MI MI IL IL IL 3 IL IL IL LLLLLL 4 L L L
L L L
R R R
R R R 1
RORORO 0
O O O 6 3
O O O
1 A A A 2
t A A A
o
ADADAD 1 Presby 9 D D D 73 D D D 2 to 2 62 3 6 3 4 Church T T T
T T T
OOO
1 T T T 0 OOO 4 OWOWOW 2 WWW
S S S
0 7 WWN WN N
S S S 9
STSTST 3 N N N T T T 2 NSNSNS
S S S 1 T T T Childrens Nursery Hertford East
J J J SHSHSH
J J J H H H
6 O O O 9 J J J HEHEHE 1
O O O 8 E E E
o OHOHOH ENENEN 2
t H H H N N N
HNHNHN NDNDND 1 N N N Station D D D
N'N'N' D D D 5 'S'S'S 'S'S'S S S S S S S
S S S STSTST 5
T T T TRTRTR 2 R R R RERERE E E E EEEEEE E E E 3 ETETET 4 T T T T T T a S S S Hall S S S STSTST TRTRTR TRTRTR RERERE 3 E E E EEEEEE 4 E E E 8 ETETET 4 T T T
0 T T T 2 5
5 0 2
1
o 9
t
7
1
5 1
ESE VIVIVS
DADADIAEIE 4 V V VS
DADVADIVAEIVE
4 DADADA
o 2
t
4
9 6
4
2 V V V
V V V
o VIVIVI
t ILILIL 2
Works 5 ILILIL
LLLLLL 5 2 L L L
LILILI 4 IEIEIE
IEIEIE
ERERER
1 R R R 1 RSRSRS S S S S S S S S S S S S STSTST T T T El Sub Sta 4 TRTRTR 4 R R R MMM to RERERE MMIMI I 35 E E E MMIMTITIT 3 EEEEEE TTRTRR 8 E E E ITITRITRR ETETET RREREE T T T EE EC C C T T T C C OCOO OOUOUU UURURR
RRTRTT TTT 3 TTT 4 o 34 1
23 t 4 1 1 Supermarket 0 7 22 8
b 4 1
3
8 t
o a 6 3
Norris 21 1
4 6
7
t
d o
2 Works 0
n ourt 1 to 12 a 4 C PPP ncy H PPRPRR 5 au PPRPRIRI I , Ch e RRROOO 3 r IOIOIO , t I I IRRR f OORORR 2 o
RRYRYY ,
YY Y 1 r
SSS d
YY Y 4
SSS 5
TTT
t
SSS o TTT M RRR 4
TTRTRR 9 C EEE 5 RRR 4 e
EEEEEE 2d h 2
EEE
t t
EETETT u
6
EEE o h TTT 1
r o
o
TTT t 9
c 8 1 9 Sherwood d 2c h rt i House ou s C t 5 iers Vill Priory
4 17
Court 1
t P o 15 i o
2 1 n b H e 5 Princess a e EE ER 7 r RRR R l AAAEE ER l WWWAARARREEE Mary WWWAARARR 2 4 Cambridge a House House e 9 s u o h lt e 3 a m 7 M o B B B 7 H B B B e t BLBLBL BBB h s L L L LULULU BBB T e U U U BIBIBI IRIRIR R UEUEUE IRIRIR E E E RRCRCC ECECEC CCC C C C CHCHCH COCOCO
HHH Prince O O O 1
HHEHEE OAOAOA
EEE A A A 3 ERERER ATATAT 0 RRR T T T L L L S S S RRR of Wales T T T L L L S S S LELELE S S S EEE A A A EYEYEY YYY A A A Y Y Y House AVAVAV C C C V V V C C C VEVEVE CCOCOO E E E OOO ENENEN OUOUOU N N N UUU NUNUNU UURURR U U U
RRR UEUEUE
RTRTRT E E E B B B
T T T E E E B B B 2
T T T BABABA 6
1 A A A
7 AKAKAK
K K K
o KEKEKE
t E E E
R R R
E E E 2 6 1 R R R a 8
R R R to
Garden Centre S S S 1 2 2 S S S 2 STSTST 7 T T T
9 Queen TRTRTR
6 R R R 1 RERERE 1 8 E E E WWW Alexandra EEEEEE WWW E E E WWW ETETET El a a a T T T a a a r r r T T T a a a 3 n rr rr rr House to rr rr rr T T T p e e e T T T t m Sub r r r o a enenen ETETET 8 H enenen 2 E E E BluecoatBluecoatBluecoat Court Court Court e n n n EEEEEE us
P P P E E E BluecoatBluecoatBluecoat Court Court Court o
Sta P P P RERERE BluecoatBluecoatBluecoat Court Court Court H PlPlPl 6 lalala R R R TRTRTR
laclaclac T T T
acacac STSTST
e e e 4
c c c 3 S S S 4
e e e 5 S S S 1 e e e 1 4 a
45 Salisbury Bluecoats AAYAYY LLWLWWAAYAYY House
AAIALILIWLWW House LLL 1
RRARAIAII RRR 2
Bank 1 WRVS
PH S S S S S S SO SO SO
5 O O O 1 O U O U O U U U U UT UT UT T T T H H H T T T
H H H
H H H
5 S S S
0 S S S
ST ST ST T T T R R R T T T R R R R E R E R E E E E 9 3 This copy has been produced specifically for Map Control Scheme purposes only. No further copies may be made Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown Copyright and may lead to prosecution or civil proceedings Reproduced from the Ordnance Survey map data with the permission of the controller of Her Majesty's Stationery Office Crown Copyright 2009 East Herts Council. LA Ref: 100018528 (
East Herts Council Address: land junction of Mill Road/Mead Lane, Hertford, Herts Wallfields Reference: 3/13/0551/FP Pegs Lane Hertford Scale: 1:2500 SG13 8EQ O.S Sheet: TL3213SE, TL3313SW, TL3212NE & TL3312NW Tel: 01279 655261 Date of Print: 22 July 2013 Page 53 This page is intentionally left blank
Page 54 Agenda Item 5c 5c 3/13/0527/FP – Demolition of the former stables, coach house and educational buildings. Change of use and conversion of Pearse House to create 12 no. apartments, erection of 10 no. dwellings, associated parking, garaging, alterations to access, refuse and recycling storage, and landscaping at Pearse House, Parsonage Lane, Bishop’s Stortford, CM23 5BQ for Marden Homes Ltd
Date of Receipt: 19.04.2013 Type: Full – Major
Parish: BISHOP’S STORTFORD
Ward: BISHOP’S STORTFORD – ALL SAINTS
RECOMMENDATION:
That, subject to the applicant entering into a Section 106 agreement to secure the following financial contributions:
• A financial contribution of £50,773 towards primary education, £57,413 towards Secondary Education, £1,137 towards youth and £4,066 towards libraries; • A financial contribution of £35,870 towards under 10’s play equipment and other improvements to landscaping at the Grange Paddocks site; • £25,000 towards improvement to bus stops in the locality of the site; • 15% of the dwellings shall be constructed to ‘Lifetime Homes’ standard. • Fire Hydrants • Monitoring Fee
that planning permission be GRANTED subject to the following planning conditions:
1. Three year time limit (1T121)
2. Programme of archaeological work (2E02)
3. Approved plans (2E103) (Insert:- Location Plan, 12015-03, 12015-04 Rev A, 12015-05 Rev A, 12015-06, 12015-07 Rev G, 12015-10 Rev B, 12015-11 Rev B, 12015-12, 12015-13, 12015-14, 12015-15, 12015-16, 12015-17, 12015-18, 12015-19, 12015-20, 12015-21 Rev A)
4. Samples of materials (2E123)
5. Construction hours of operation (6N07)
6. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the recommendations as set out in the Bat Survey and Great Page 55 3/13/0527/FP
Crested Newt Assessment dated 18 October 2012.
Reason: To protect the habitats of bats which are a protected species under the Wildlife and Access to the Countryside Act 1981, and in accordance with policy ENV16 of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007.
7. No development shall take place until a Construction Method Statement has been submitted to, and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved Statement shall be adhered to throughout the construction period. The Statement shall provide for:
• Methods for accessing the site; • The parking of vehicles of site operatives and visitors; • Loading and unloading of plant and materials; • Storage of plant and materials used in constructing the development; • The erection and maintenance of security hoarding including decorative displays and facilities for public viewing, where appropriate; • Wheel washing facilities; • Measures to control the emission of dust and dirt during construction; • A scheme for recycling/disposing of waste resulting from demolition and construction works.
Reason: To ensure that the construction works and associated activity are acceptable in terms of amenity of the area and highway safety.
8. All existing trees, hedges and hedgerows shall be retained, unless shown on the approved drawings as being removed. All trees, hedges and hedgerows on and immediately adjoining the site shall be protected from damage as a result of works on the site, to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority in accordance with relevant British Standards, for the duration of the works on site and until at least five years following contractual practical completion of the approved development. In the event that trees, hedges or hedgerows become damaged or otherwise defective during such period, the Local Planning Authority shall be notified as soon as reasonably practicable and remedial action agreed Page 56 3/13/0527/FP
and implemented. In the event that any tree, hedge or hedgerow dies or is removed without the prior consent of the Local Planning Authority, it shall be replaced as soon as is reasonably practicable and, in any case, by not later than the end of the first available planting season, with trees of such size, species and in such number and positions as may be agreed with the Authority.
Reason: To ensure the continuity of amenity afforded by existing trees, in accordance with policies ENV2 and ENV11 of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007.
9. Notwithstanding the details shown on the approved drawings, no development shall take place until full details of both hard and soft landscape works have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority and these works shall be carried out as approved. These details shall include a) means of enclosure; b) hard surfacing materials; c) planting plans; d) schedules of plants noting species, planting sizes and proposed numbers/densities and e) a timetable for implementation.
Reason: To ensure the provision of amenity afforded by appropriate landscape design, in accordance with policy ENV2 of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007.
10. All hard and soft landscape works shall be carried out in accordance with the details approved pursuant to Condition 09. The works shall be carried out prior to the occupation of any part of the development or in accordance with the programme agreed with the local planning authority. Any trees or plants that, within a period of 5 years after planting are removed, die or become damaged or defective shall be replaced with others of the same species, size and number as originally approved unless the local planning authority has given written consent to any variation.
Reason: To ensure the provision, establishment and maintenance of a reasonable standard of landscaping in accordance with the approved designs, in accordance with policy ENV2 of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007.
11. Retention of parking spaces (3V204)
Directives:
1. Other legislation (01OL1) Page 57 3/13/0527/FP
2. Planning Obligation (08PO)
3. Unsuspected contamination (33UC)
4. Street Naming and Numbering (19SN)
Summary of Reasons for Decision
East Herts Council has considered the applicant’s proposal in a positive and proactive manner with regard to the policies of the Development Plan (Minerals Local Plan, Waste Core Strategy and Development Management Policies DPD 2012 and the ’saved’ policies of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007); the National Planning Policy Framework and in accordance with the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2012 (as amended). The balance of the considerations having regard to those policies and is that permission should be granted.
(130527FP.MP)
1.0 Background:
1.1 The application site is shown on the attached OS extract. The site is located on the northern edge of Bishop’s Stortford along Parsonage Lane which is a predominantly residential area except for the educational establishments to the north and south of the site beyond the properties in Friars Road.
1.2 To the north east of the site and to the frontage of Parsonage Lane is an extensive landscaped area which is comprised of several large mature trees. Those trees and other trees within the site are protected by an Area Tree Preservation Order.
1.3 Further along the frontage and to the west is a red brick wall and gate which abut the road and lead to a red bricked building. The building also fronts Parsonage Lane and has a central gable with exposed timber within the eaves and upper gable and white fenestration. The gable is flanked by two subservient hipped projections which have small inset dormer windows and a dovecote within the roof. The building fronts directly onto the road and is shown on the application drawings to be a ‘coach house’, which is how it is described hereon in this report. Attached to the coach house and forming a ‘U’ shape into the south of the site is a further building described as ‘Former Stables’ on the application drawings. This building appears as a contemporary addition Page 58 3/13/0527/FP
but has similar form and proportions to the Coach House.
1.4 To the south of the Coach House and former Stables is the principal building on the site – Pearse House. The building is of significant proportions and has an attractive Arts and Crafts style with a multifaceted appearance and interesting windows and exposed timber. There is a modest spacing between the flank elevations of this building and the boundary (around five metres) where there is an attractive red bricked wall of around 2metres in height. Surrounding Pearse House and to the east within the site are a number of mature trees and other landscape features. There is a parking space to the east of Pearse House and within the U shape of the former stables and Coach House. There is also a further parking area to the east of the site and beyond the large collection of trees which front onto Parsonage Lane.
1.5 To the west of the site is a small residential development of detached dwellings which is known as Friars Wood. Dwellings within that development are set at varying distances away from the boundary. To the south of the site is an open space which is a designated recreational area.
1.6 The proposed development involves the demolition of the Coach House and former Stables and their replacement with a row of five terraced dwellings with associated amenity and parking area to the rear. The proposed development also incorporates the conversion of Pearse House into 12 residential units with parking / garages to the east of the building. On the land to the east of Pearse House and to the east of the existing Coach House, five detached residential dwellings are proposed. The proposed development therefore incorporates the provision of 22 residential dwellings in total.
2.0 Site History:
2.1 Planning permission was granted within LPA reference 3/89/0423/FP for lecture rooms with associated residential accommodation and garaging. Planning permission was granted for an extension to the main dwelling within LPA reference 3/91/1806/FP. A lawful development certificate was granted at the site within LPA reference 3/95/0795/CL as a residential training centre and function venue.
2.2 The most recent planning history relates to LPA reference 3/10/1831/FP, for the change of use of two existing detached blocks from hotel to residential units - 5no 2 bed cottages; 3no 2 bed flats and 4no 1 bed flats – no decision was made on that application, as it was withdrawn. Page 59 3/13/0527/FP
2.3 A certificate of lawfulness has also been granted under LPA reference 3/13/0093/CL in relation to formation of a car park to the east of the existing buildings on the site.
3.0 Consultation Responses:
3.1 Environmental Health advises that any planning permission granted should include planning conditions relating to construction hours of operation and soil decontamination.
3.2 Thames Water advises that it is the responsibility of the developer to ensure proper provision for surface water drainage. The applicant should ensure that storm flows are attenuated or regulated into the receiving public network through on or off site storage. Thames Water approval will be required for any discharge into the public sewer.
3.3 Natural England comment that the site is within an area which could benefit from enhanced green infrastructure which can perform a range of functions including improved flood risk management, provision of green space, climate change adaption and biodiversity enhancement.
Natural England comment that bats and great crested newts which are European Protected species may be impacted by the proposed development. In respect of bats and in reference to their standing advice, Natural England comment that further survey work is required to assess the impact on bats, through disturbance to individuals, or from damage or destruction of roost. With regards to the impact on great crested newts Natural England confirm that the Council should accept the findings of the applicant’s ecology report and consider promoting biodiversity enhancements for great crested newts.
3.4 Herts Biological Records Centre (HBRC) recommends that planning conditions be attached with any grant of planning permission requiring the following:
• The applicants Great Crested Newt strategy be implemented; • Conversion works to Pearse House do not take place until a license has been obtained from Natural England and that conversion works to the roof of Pearse House only take place from mid-September to October; • The roof/loft space of Pearse House should be retained; • Bat roosting spaces should be provided within the roof space of Pearse House; • Bat boxes should be provided within the grounds; Page 60 3/13/0527/FP
• The roof of Pearse House should be ‘soft stripped’ by hand in the presence of an ecologist; • External lighting must not illuminate bat roost access points.
3.5 Herts and Middlex Wildlife Trust (HMWT) advises that the survey methods, conclusions and recommendations as set out in the ecology report are suitable. The development should not result in any significant ecological harm or infringement of wildlife legislation providing mitigation is complied with. As such, mitigation should form a condition of any approval.
HMWT note that many of the mature trees are to be retained and the provision of new planting will help increase opportunities for wildlife. Any new planting should include indigenous species only.
3.6 The Environment Agency (EA) recommend that a planning condition be attached with any grant of permission requiring that should the presence of contamination be found all work should cease until a remediation strategy has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
The site is within flood zone 1 and is under a hectare and the EA refer the Council to their standing advice. This recommends that surface water best management practices are incorporated
The EA advises also that the site is in an area of serious water stress and water efficient technologies should be incorporated into the development.
3.7 The Fire Safety Department advises that the following provisions for access and water supply would be expected:
• Appropriate access for fire fighting vehicles in accordance with relevant British Standard including relevant turning head; • Appropriate water supplies in relation to relevant British Standard and the provision of fire hydrants.
3.8 The County Historic Environment Unit have commented that Pearse House is a large Arts and Crafts styled house built in 1878 on a site occupied by an earlier house known as ‘The Villa’. The house remained in private ownership until after WW2 and it has since had various institutional uses. The heritage statement submitted with the application indicates that the building retains much of its original character and features and would be eligible for local listing. The site is on the south Page 61 3/13/0527/FP
side of Parsonage Lane which is on the line of Stane Street, the Roman road from Braughing to Colchester. Substantial evidence of occupation of Late Bronze Age, Iron Age and Roman date has been excavated prior to developments to the north-east of Woodside Industrial Estate and the football ground. In addition, a sherd of Anglo-Saxon pottery has been found close to the boundary of the site.
The County Archaeologist therefore considers that the position of the proposed development is such that it should be regarded as likely to have an impact on heritage assets of archaeological and historical significance and a planning condition requiring the implementation of a program of archaeological works in accordance with a written scheme of investigation is considered to be both necessary and reasonable.
3.9 Hertfordshire County Highways comment that they do not wish to restrict the grant of planning permission subject to planning conditions.
The Highways Officer comments that the application is supported by a Transport Assessment which correctly assesses and identifies the traffic generation and concludes that the proposal will not give rise to a significant overall increase in traffic movements when compared to the existing use of the site. The Highways Officer confirms that there are no highway reasons that would justify an objection on highway safety or capacity.
The Highways Officer confirms that the site is within easy walking distance of the local bus stops but located on the edge of the town about 1.5miles from the town centre. The site is located on three local bus routes with good connections to the town centre and Stansted Airport. There are several bus stops within 400m of the site – bus stops in proximity to the site need improvements to the kerbing and shelter and financial contributions of £17,000 and £8,000 would assist in improving these features.
3.10 The Councils Engineers comment that the site is within a flood zone 1 and there is no records of historic flooding. The proposed development does incorporate areas of impermeability with an increased risk of flooding. Further, the proposal does not incorporate the best quality design drainage solution and the provision of above ground SUDs would compensate for the new impermeable areas.
3.11 Herts Constabulary comment that amendments have been made to the scheme and they now support the application on the provision that ‘hostile’ planting is provided around Pearse House.
Page 62 3/13/0527/FP
3.12 The Conservation Officer recommends that planning permission be granted. The Officer considers that, in assessing the proposal against English Heritage guidance, that the significance of building can be summarised as a large Arts and Crafts style building constructed in 1878. The building has had various uses since WW2 but the building retains much of its original character and features. The building provides a link between past and present and retains its historic appearance as building of its era of construction. The building therefore positively contributes to the local character of the town. The style of the building is distinctive and the detailing and craftsmanship are such that the building has local interest and may be considered as a non- designated heritage asset.
Through the proposed conversion of the main building it is inevitable that some features will be lost, re-used or boxed in. The plan form of Pearse House building is largely unchanged and the original staircase(s) which make a significant contribution remain in situ. The retention of that plan form as part of this proposal has resulted in some loss of original doors, radiators, fireplaces and a glazed screen. The external alterations to the building will have little impact on the architectural style of the building.
The most contentious element of the proposal is the demolition of the stable block and coach house located to the east of the principal building. However, having regard to the historic plans relating to the site, the Conservation Officer considers that the stable block/coach house building has seen various contemporary additions and alterations and the value of the buildings has been reduced to their external architectural detail and relationship with the principal building and the frontage onto Parsonage Lane.
The Conservation Officer comments that the value of those buildings proposed to be demolished has been acknowledged through the proposed replacement building. That new building (plots 13-17) is of reduced footprint and allows the fuller extent of Pearse House to be appreciated; replicates some of the architectural detailing of the existing building to be demolished and provides a new footpath onto Parsonage Lane. The Conservation Officer accordingly raises no objection to the demolition of those existing buildings on the site.
The proposed development incorporates the provision of additional dwellings on the site which are considered by the Officer to be of an appropriate design to the context of the Arts and Craft style of Pearse House.
Page 63 3/13/0527/FP
3.13 The Landscape Officer recommends that planning permission be refused. In respect of the impact on existing trees, the Officer acknowledges that a number of trees are proposed to be removed – however, most of the structure planting along Parsonage Lane is to be retained and there is a reasonable amount of new indicative planting proposed as part of the proposal.
The Landscape Officer comments that the proposed landscape layout is reasonable but some concerns are raised with certain aspects of the development:- The footprint of plot 21 is shown to be tight against a 1.9 metre high wall which does not provide sufficient space for effective soft landscaped boundary treatment. The Landscape Officer also comments that the ‘former stables and coach house’ is a prominent and unusual built structure in the landscape and is an important local landmark in the street scene which contributes to the landscape character and distinctiveness of the area. This building is to be replaced by a new building with the provision of a public footway to the front – such a building fails, in the Officers view, to respect the existing local distinctiveness of the area.
3.14 The County Council’s Development Services team comment that as the application is for 22 residential dwellings it falls above the current threshold where financial contributions are sought to minimise the impact on Hertfordshire County Council Services for the local community. The following contributions are sought:
• £50,773 towards primary education; • £57,413 towards Secondary Education; • £1,137 towards youth and; • £4,066 towards libraries.
4.0 Town Council Representations:
4.1 Bishop’s Stortford Town Council objects to the planning application. The proposed development will result in the demolition of the former stables and the coach house which are of historical importance to the town. The Town Council also query the alteration to a hedgerow to provide a new opening.
5.0 Other Representations:
5.1 The application has been advertised by way of press notice, site notice and neighbour notification.
Page 64 3/13/0527/FP
5.2 A letter of representation has been received on behalf of the Friars Wood Residents Association. The Association welcome the principal of the application which will see the reuse of an historic building which is to be welcomed. The resident’s association further support the provision of a new pavement along Parsonage Lane which, the Association infers, will improve access to the school during the busy school periods. However, the association comment that the building should be set further back from the road to allow for a greater level of visibility upon exiting Friars Wood. Furthermore, concern is levelled at the provision of any additional windows which will front onto existing dwellings in terms of the potential for overlooking and loss of privacy.
5.3 A letter of representation has been received from no.17 Friars Wood which largely replicates the comments from the Residents Association. In addition, the representation from no.17 raises concern with regards to the impact of the garage building in terms of its height and relationship with number 17 Friars Wood and the loss of light to the utility, kitchen, garden and side passage. The letter of representation also refers to a private covenant relating to a wall and requests that the wall to the boundary be rebuilt. The letter of representation raises concerns with regards to overlooking and loss of privacy to bedrooms serving no 17; drainage issues associated with a culvert; and a decline in bats visiting Pearse House in recent months.
5.4 Councillor Colin Woodward has commented that the proposal involves the loss of a section of hedgerow and that the provision of a new access to Birchwood School is not required.
6.0 Policy:
6.1 The relevant ‘saved’ Local Plan policies in this application include the following:
SD2 The principal of development HSG3 Affordable Housing HSG4 Affordable Housing Criteria HSG6 Lifetime Homes TR2 Access to New Developments TR7 Car Parking – Standards EDE Loss of Employment Sites ENV1 Design and Environmental Quality ENV2 Landscaping ENV3 Planning Out Crime – New Development ENV11 Protection of Existing Hedgerows and Trees ENV16 Protected Species Page 65 3/13/0527/FP
LRC1 Sport and Recreation Facilities
6.2 The National Planning Policy Framework is also a material consideration in the determination of the application
7.0 Considerations:
7.1 The main planning considerations to this application relate to the following matters:
• The principle of the proposed development; • The loss of an employment generator; • Development on land designated for sport and recreation; • Affordable housing provision; • The impact on the character and appearance of the existing buildings and surroundings; • The impact on landscape features; • The impact on protected species; • Highway matters and parking; • Archaeology; • Neighbour amenity.
The principle of development
7.2 The site is located within the built up area of Bishop’s Stortford wherein policy SD2 sets out that development should be concentrated. The principle of the proposed development is therefore acceptable.
7.3 The proposed development incorporates the provision of 22 additional dwellings in a sustainable location. The core planning principle as set out in the NPPF is to proactively support and drive development to deliver the homes the Country needs. Significant weight must therefore be attached to the positive way in which the proposed development will accord with this core planning principle in boosting the supply of housing in a sustainable location.
Loss of employment generator
7.4 Policy EDE2 of the Local Plan requires a consideration of whether the proposed development would result in the loss of employment on the site. It requires evidence to be submitted to show the existing lawful use of the site for employment has been fully explored without success. As noted above, LPA reference 3/10/1831/FP was withdrawn during consideration of the application following Officers concerns that the Page 66 3/13/0527/FP
requirements of this policy had not been fully addressed.
7.5 The applicant has sought to address this concern through the submission of additional information and marketing.
7.6 The applicant sets out that the hotel use of the site ceased at or around March 2011 when it was most commonly used as a conference and training venue. The site has been marketed as such by property consultants since that date. Sale boards were erected and marketing particulars were distributed together with online sale details.
7.7 The applicant confirms that interest in the site was relatively strong but focused primarily on residential schemes or for a care home. Interest in the building as a hotel use or office/training conference centre was negligible. Two unconditional offers were received from two locally based residential developers.
7.8 From the information submitted Officers understand that interest in the continued use of the building in its current use has been very low. Some interest has been shown in the use of the building as a care home which would be capable of providing some employment in accordance with policy EDE2. However, such a use was not progressed with and Officers are satisfied that an appropriate level of marketing has been undertaken over an extended period of time to show that there is no interest in the employment use of the building. The proposed development therefore accords with policy EDE2a) of the Local Plan.
Sport and recreation use of land
7.9 The plans submitted with the application show the development of the existing car park area to the east of the site to form residential dwellings. This area of land is designated as land for sport and recreation and its development is contrary to policy LRC1 of the Local Plan. However, the use of the land for sport and recreation has not taken place for a number of years and, as noted in paragraph 2.3 above, a certificate of lawfulness confirms this to be the case. As such, there is no conflict with the aforementioned policy.
Affordable housing provision and other financial contributions
7.10 In considering this application the Council should have regard to the NPPF which sets out that sustainable development is the golden thread running throughout the planning process and that the core planning principle should be to proactively drive and support sustainable economic development to deliver the homes that the country needs. In Page 67 3/13/0527/FP
pursing sustainable development, the NPPF sets out that careful attention should be made to viability. The NPPF sets out that, to ensure viability, the costs of any requirements likely to be applied to development including affordable housing should, when taking account of the normal cost of development, provide competitive returns to a willing developer to enable the development to be deliverable.
7.11 Policy HSG3 of the Local Plan states that affordable housing provision will be expected on development within Bishop’s Stortford which propose 15 or more dwellings. 22 dwellings are proposed here, which would fall within the threshold where affordable housing should be provided. The proposed development does not incorporate any affordable dwellings and is therefore a departure to the Local Plan policy. Affordable housing is a priority to the Council and careful regard should be made to any material considerations the applicant puts forward to justify the lack of affordable housing in this case.
7.12 To demonstrate this and, in accordance with the Council’s Affordable Housing SPD, a viability assessment has been submitted by the applicant. The aforementioned SPD requires that any financial appraisal be considered independently. An independent review of the applicant’s viability appraisal has been undertaken by the DVS, which is the commercial arm of the Valuation Office Agency.
7.13 DVS have commented that their appraisal of the viability report shows that the development will have a deficit of £99,240 against the agreed benchmark figure and that it is not viable to provide full financial contributions.
7.14 With regards to other contributions, as the application is for 22 residential units, the need for financial contributions is required under the Council’s Planning Obligations SPD and the Herts County Council (HCC) Planning Obligations Toolkit. HCC have confirmed that they will require contributions towards primary and secondary education, childcare, youth and library facilities. Those figures are set out at the head of this report. The contributions sought are based on the number of units and bedrooms proposed, and the figures are considered necessary and reasonable based on pressures that the development will place on existing infrastructure. The obligations are therefore considered to meet the tests set out in S122 of The Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations (CIL) 2010.
7.15 With regards to Highways contributions, the Planning Obligations SPD and policy TR8 require that, where new developments generate a need for new parking provision that a contributions of £500 (index linked) per Page 68 3/13/0527/FP
vehicular parking space be made. The existing site which accommodates a hotel use has a significant level of parking spaces associated with its use which exceeds the level of parking proposed in this application. As such, the proposed development does not generate a need for new parking spaces and Officers do not recommend such a financial contribution, in this respect.
7.16 The Highways Officer identifies that there are bus stops in close proximity to the site and such bus routes give good access to the town centre, surrounding areas and Stansted airport. The bus stops closest to the site do not meet accessibility requirements in terms of easy access kerbing and there is limited shelter provision. The bus stops are therefore a high priority for improvements and contributions of £25,000 would provide sufficient funds for improvements of those bus stops. The proposed contributions will improve the sustainable transport facilities in the immediate locality which is encouraged in the NPPF. The proposed improvements to the bus stops are proportionate to the development and fairly and reasonably related in scale and kind to the development and are therefore considered to meet the tests set out in S122 of The Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations (CIL) 2010.
7.17 The East Herts Council SPD also requires contributions towards open space provision. The Council’s PPG17 audit identifies that there are deficiencies in amenity green space, outdoors sports facilities, parks and public gardens and children and young people.
7.18 The Planning Obligations SPD identifies that, for a development of this scale, that the following contributions are required:
• Parks and Public Gardens - £17,768 • Outdoor Sports Facilities - £55,978 • Amenity Green Space - £9,646 • Children and Young People - £6,319
7.19 The Environment Manager (Open Space) has been consulted on these contributions and has advised that the Council have been waiting for the opportunity for external funding to introduce a new play area to Grange Paddocks which currently has no play provision. The Council have earmarked a potential location on the site near to the leisure centre and the new footpath link into the town centre. The need at this location is for an under 10 facility. There is provision for older children at the Councils existing play area in Parsonage Lane and also at the Town Council play space in Sworders Field nearby. The proposed location for the play facility is around 1500m from the Pearse House site. The Page 69 3/13/0527/FP
Council has increased commitment within its corporate priorities relating to the Aging Well Agenda and various health initiatives to provide facilities to encourage healthy activity. The Environment Manager considers that the proposed monies can be used for the installation of a facility that combines play and fitness equipment and that enhances the landscape and encourages visitors to enjoy the outdoor environment in the park.
7.20 Having regards to the comments from the Environment Manager and, taking into account the requirements of the Planning Obligations SPD and deficiencies in open space, Officers consider that a financial contribution towards open space is considered to meet the tests set out in S122 of The Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations (CIL) 2010.
7.21 However, and as noted above, there are viability issues with regards to the development proposal and the Councils viability assessors have identified that it is not viable to provide affordable housing nor to provide full financial contributions.
7.22 Officers acknowledge that affordable housing is a priority for the Council and that the provision of nil affordable housing does not weigh in favour of the development. Affordable housing and financial contributions have been considered and assessed cumulatively by the applicant and the Councils viability assessors. Officers have sought to agree a balance between achieving a good housing mix against securing financial contributions to improvements to infrastructure to make the development acceptable in planning terms.
7.23 DVS advise that the development, with the provision of no affordable housing is only able to provide financial contributions to the sum of £174,259.
7.24 The County Council contributions cumulatively amount to £138,389. Given that such contributions are towards education and highways, Officers consider that full County contributions should be required.
7.25 As such, this leaves a figure of £35,870 towards other contributions. Officers have identified above that there is a need for open space contributions, particularly for a children’s play equipment and other landscape works. Whilst £35,870 is some way below that required in the Planning Obligations SPD there is viability evidence to justify a reduced level of contributions and Officers consider that the £35,870 should be allocated towards open space provision.
Page 70 3/13/0527/FP
Character and appearance
7.26 The proposed development incorporates the demolition of the buildings which front the road and the conversion of the existing building into residential flats. The buildings are not listed and the site is not located within the Conservation Area. Nevertheless, during pre-application discussions Officers advised the applicant that Pearse House is considered to represent a non-designated heritage asset of local historical significance and its retention should be encouraged. As such, the conversion of this building, as recognised by the Conservation Officer and Friars Wood Residents Association is a positive aspect of the proposed development. Pearse House is a well articulated and fragmented building and the elevational treatment and roofscape which can be viewed along Parsonage Lane is of much interest and is of historical significance.
7.27 Alterations externally to Pearse House itself are fairly modest including the insertion of windows. More significant internal alterations are proposed to subdivide the building into apartments. The internal significance of the building has been impacted by the previous alterations and use of the building as a hotel. There are some small elements of interest within the building including the main hallway and various architraves and fireplaces which hold the main value. In any event, the proposed internal alterations are generally considered to be acceptable and will result in limited impact on the historical interest of the building.
7.28 Whilst Officers recognise that the principal building is of significance and may be considered as a non-designated heritage asset, Officers do not consider that the same level of weight should be attached to the other buildings within the site. Officers recognise the comments from the Town Council and Landscape Officer in this respect and the concern with the loss of the stable building / coach house structure which fronts directly onto Parsonage Lane.
7.29 In considering these buildings the Council must have regard to the NPPF which advises that the effect of an application of the significance of a non-designated heritage asset should be taken into account in determining an application. In weighing applications that directly affect non designated heritage assets, a balanced judgement will be required having regard to the scale of any harm or loss and the significance of the heritage asset.
7.30 Officers acknowledge that the building which fronts onto Parsonage Lane does provide an interesting frontage onto the road and provides a Page 71 3/13/0527/FP
historical connection with the principal building which is set further into the site. The building therefore has value to the street scene and the wider setting. However, whilst the building has value, this must be assessed having regard to the scale of harm. The Conservation Officer raises no objection to the demolition of the building having regard to the value of the significance; the building which is replaced by it (of similar design and reduced footprint) and the provision of a new pedestrian link to the road. The proposed development will, in addition, provide much improved visibility from vehicles exiting Friars Wood (who’s visibility is currently impeded by the existing building). Whilst Officers therefore acknowledge the value of the existing buildings fronting onto Parsonage Lane, having regard to the value of the building, the proportions and scale of the proposed building and the improvements to highway safety and a pedestrian footway and, taking into account the comments from the Conservation Officer and County Archaeologist, Officers consider that the demolition of these buildings is justified, in this case having regard to the requirements of the NPPF.
7.31 The proportion of the replacement building is identified above to be of reduced footprint in comparison to the buildings it replaces. The design draws upon the form and design of the existing building and is of attractive proportions which provide activity and interest to the road frontage. To the rear an appropriate level of amenity space is provided and the building sits well within the plot and in relation to Pearse House.
7.32 Turning to the proposed dwellings to the east of Pearse House, the Conservation Officer considers that these dwellings are of appropriate design which respects the Arts and Craft style of the principal building. The dwellings are generally of multifaceted appearance, but of more subordinate proportions and design to Pearse House. Officers are of the opinion that the overall design, scale and form of these detached dwellings are appropriate and will ensure a degree of unity with the principal building. The detached dwellings are also well spaced within their plots with an appropriate level of amenity commensurate with their size.
Highways and parking
7.33 The development incorporates the provision of 43 parking spaces which equates to just under two spaces per unit. The proposed plans indicate the provision of a greater number of parking spaces for the detached dwellings which is commensurate to their larger size. Officers are nevertheless of the opinion that the level of parking is appropriate for this sustainable location with good access to public transport and the town centre amenities. Page 72 3/13/0527/FP
7.34 With regards to access arrangements, having regard to the existing lawful use of the site, Officers consider that the provision of a residential development will not lead to a significant increase in traffic movements which would be harmful to highway safety or capacity.
7.35 Officers note the comments from the Residents Association that the new building serving plots 13-17 should be set back further from Parsonage Lane to allow for better visibility from Friars Wood. However, the Highways Officer makes no such recommendation and Officers consider that the proposal will result in an improvement in visibility from that road junction, in comparison to the existing arrangement, which weighs in favour of the development proposal.
Neighbour amenity
7.36 The siting and nature of the proposed development is such that the main considerations relate to the impact on Friars Wood. Dwellings within Friars Wood form an ‘L’ shape around the west and southern boundary. Numbers 1-15 generally front onto the western and southern elevation of the principle building, Pearse House, which is proposed to be converted. Those dwellings within Friars Wood (1-15) are set back at differing distances to Pearse House by between 26metres as a minimum to around 30-35metres as a maximum. Whilst Officers acknowledge that additional windows are proposed to the building, having regard to that distance and, given the existing use of the building there will be no significant impact on the amenity of numbers 1-15 in terms of overlooking or loss of privacy that would warrant the refusal of planning permission.
7.37 Number 17 Friars Wood has a closer relationship with the development and Officers acknowledge that the proposed garage building will be visible from that property. Officers further acknowledge that the garage building is at an elevated position to the rear garden and elevation of number 17. However, given that the garage is located around 1.8 metres to the north of number 17, at a height of 4.5 metres with a hipped roof which slopes away from the boundary with this neighbour and, given the siting of an existing boundary wall, I do not consider that the garage building would result in a significant impact on the amenity of number 17 in terms of loss of light, over shadowing or overbearing impact.
7.38 The letter of representation from number 17 Friars Wood also raises concern with regards to overlooking between higher level windows proposed on the south west elevation. Two windows are proposed within the gables and a new rooflight. Given the existing openings that Page 73 3/13/0527/FP
are located on the south west elevation and, given the distance of the window serving bedroom 1 of apartment 12 and the distance to the frontage of number 17, which is around 19 metres and the angle between the window serving bedroom 2 and the frontage of number 17, Officers do not consider that there will be a significantly detrimental impact in terms of overlooking or loss of privacy to this neighbour or any other neighbour.
Landscape
7.39 As noted above the site is the subject of an area Tree Preservation Order. To support the application an arboricultural report has been submitted with the application and assesses the condition/impact of the proposed development on those protected trees.
7.40 Officers consider that the most important trees in landscape terms are those that front Parsonage Lane. Those trees are significant in their size and proportions and provide valued amenity from the street scene and provide a soft screen to the site. Internally, those trees add to the setting of the building.
7.41 Within the site is a belt of trees which run northeast to southwest and form a boundary with the existing parking space and adjoining school playing field. Those trees appear to be mainly self set and mutually suppressed from close spacing and, in some cases have defects. Those trees are proposed to be removed to allow for the provision of parking and buildings and no objections to the removal of these trees are made by the Landscape Officer.
Drainage
7.42 The comments from the Councils’ Engineers are acknowledged. The proposed development incorporates a subterranean storage tank to accommodate storm flows and a modest area of permeable paving. Officers acknowledge that the provision of subterranean storage tanks are not desirable and the least sustainable form of surface water drainage given that it is not always apparent if they are working properly. The site is nevertheless not within an area of flood risk and no objections to the development have been received from the Environment Agency. The potential for other above ground SUDs including swales and balancing ponds would likely be limited owing to the protected trees within the site and the amenity space/parking and garages which form an important part of the application. In such circumstances, Officers consider that the proposed drainage solution is acceptable, in this case. Page 74 3/13/0527/FP
Protected species
7.43 With regards to the impact on protected species, the applicant has provided an ecological report which includes information on ecological surveys. That information sets out that the building is used by a small number of bats and is most likely a transitional roost rather than a maternity roost. The bat report sets out that the proposed development will not result in an adverse impact on protected species if mitigation measures are incorporated.
7.44 Natural England recommend that further work be undertaken in respect of the impact on bats – HBRC do not make any such comment but advise that, from the recent surveys, we know that bats are present and various recommendations are made. HBRC and HMWT consider that there is sufficient information for the Council to determine this application and advise that the recommendations and bat mitigation measures are implemented via planning condition.
7.45 HBRC advise that a license will be required by Natural England for the removal of a bat roost and the Local Planning Authority is also required to apply the three derogation tests in accordance with the Habitat Regulations April 2010. These tests are set out below.
7.46 Firstly, the proposal must be for imperative reasons of overriding public interest or for public health and safety. The proposal being considered by Members is the reuse of a building of historic interest and the provision of housing which will assist the Council in meeting its five year housing targets. Officers therefore consider that the proposed development is of sufficient merit to meet this first test.
7.47 Secondly, there must be no satisfactory alternative. The proposed development would provide a viable use for a building of historic and architectural importance that both the Council and Town Council wish to see retained. Furthermore, any re-use of this building is likely to have some impact on protected species. Without a viable use it is likely that the existing building may fall into disrepair and could then be totally lost.
7.48 Thirdly, the favourable conservation status of the species must be maintained. As set out above, the applicant has provided information with regard to measures which could be required to be implemented through a planning condition to mitigate against the impact on the protected species. On that basis it is considered that the conservation status of the species would not be adversely affected by this development.
Page 75 3/13/0527/FP
7.49 Officers recommend that a planning condition be attached with any grant of planning permission requiring that the recommendations in the bat survey be implemented.
7.50 With regards to the impact on Great Crested Newts, there are ponds within 190m which the ecological survey submits as average suitability for newts. The ecology report does not however recommend that any further survey work or that there will be any harm on newts.
8.0 Conclusion:
8.1 The application site is located within the built up area of Bishop’s Stortford where, in principle, there is no objection to development. The proposed development will bring forward a viable reuse of an important building and sufficient information has been provided to show that there are no other viable uses.
8.2 Financial information which has been independently assessed has been submitted to show that the provision of affordable housing would not lead to a viable scheme. Viability is an important planning consideration, as set out in the NPPF and Officers therefore consider that the provision of nil affordable housing is acceptable in this case. Linked to viability are other financial contributions. Officers consider that contributions relating to education, transport and open space are reasonable in this respect and will result in a viable scheme.
8.3 The proposed development does involve the demolition of a building to the front of the site – demolition of this building is considered to be acceptable having regard to the wider benefits of enabling improved visibility and access to a neighbouring residential area and the positive new building which replaces it which is considered to be of appropriate design and scale.
8.4 The conversion of the building will see the reuse of an important heritage asset and together with other detached dwellings will ensure that the redevelopment of the site is appropriate to the context of the site and surroundings.
8.5 There will be no significant impact on highway safety, landscape features or protected species and neighbour amenity.
8.6 Given the presumption in favour of sustainable development in the NPPF, Officers recommend that planning permission be granted, subject to the signing of a Section 106 agreement and planning conditions. Page 76
1
8
9 2
9
1
9 3
WWW 3 WWW OOWOWW OOO RROROO 0 R R R R R R 0 HH H 2 HHH THTHTH T T T S S S AAT AT T S S S AAA DSDSDS EAEAEA D D D EEE NDNDND HHEHEE N N N HHH ANANAN HHH A A A LALALA L L L DLDLDL D D D
D D D 1
9 OO OO OO 7 OO OO OO OO OO OO 6 W W W W W W W W W
THTHTH THTHET CHE EC C T TETE OE OO HH CH C PCSPSPS E EC COE POCPOEPE E
OPOSPOESPESE
SESESE 2 Birchwood
1 High School
141 4 2
7
14 BIRCHWOOD 3 HIGH SCHOOL
1 1
53 4 4 P
1 PPP 1 7 A PPAPAA 61
2 PPAPARARSRSS RRSRSOSOO R SSOSONONANAA NNANAGAGG AAGAGEGE EL L L S
EE EL L ALANANN AANANENEE O EEE N AG 2 E
L
1
1 A 6
2 N EEE EEE SESESE E SSS OOSOSS OOO LOLOLO L L L CCL CL L C C C C C C H H H HHH CCHCHH TCTCTC TCTCTC AAT AT T AAA HAHAHA H H H H H H W W WW WAW A 2 A 1 Friars EEE EEE SESESE SSS Lodge OOSOSS LOLOLO 2 LOLOLO 4 CCL CL L C C C T TC TC C
T T T
OOT OT T 1 OOO 1 COCOCO CCC SCSCSC SSS AASASS AAA AAA
1 14
AAA AASASCSCC SSCSCOCOOTTT OOOTT TC C C TT TC C LCLOLOO LLOLOOSSESEE Friars SSESEE
House
2
1
5 3
DDD DDD
OODODD
OOO
3 OOOO 2 OOO WWOWOO Walden Court W W W SS WS W W S SS RRSRSS RRR IAIARIARR IAIAIA RRIARIAIA FRFRFR 8 FRFRFR FFF Pearse 5
House
2
1
1
7
4 1
Summercroft
Primary School
El Sub Sta
PlawPlawPlaw Hatch Hatch Hatch PlawPlawPlaw Hatch Hatch Hatch CornerCornerCorner CornerCornerCorner
PlawPlawPlaw Hatch Hatch Hatch Corner Corner Corner
PlawPlawPlaw Hatch Hatch Hatch Corner Corner Corner 1
D 2
A 1
2 DDD O AADADD OOAOADADD SITE RROROAOAA OOO R R R WWW R OOWOWW MMOMOO NNMNMM UUNUNN DDUDUU DDD
W Manor Farm O
Manor 5
Lodge 6 7 UNM
D Hurst Cottage
EEE C LC OLCSOLSOS MMAMYAEYASEYSESOOSSEOESE YEYSEY SEC SLC LCLEEE MMAMAA C LC OLCSOLSOS
MMAMYAEYASEYSES 6 8
7
1 0 1 3
Fairacre
5
9
4 E
SSHSHOHOORRTRTCTCC SSHSHOHOORRTRTCTCCRROROOFFTFTT
1 RRTRTCTCCRROROOFFTFTT
Eastleigh 1 8
2
6 B
1 D CCECEE CCECECECICLILI LC C LCLOLOOSSESEE CCECECECICLILI LC C LCLOLOOSSESEE Dormy House OOOSSESEE
RRR RRARAA RRARAYAYY
AAYAYNYNN
YYNYNN NNHNHH 7 HHAHAA HHAHAA AAMAMM MM M
MM MR R R
R R OROO C RRR OOAOAA
OOAOAA
DDD 1
AADADD 3 3 DDD 1
Woodford House A
1 Bramfield
tre en
C
1 s 6 es
in
s 1 u 5 B ks in 4 L Cornerways 2
he
T 1 0
1
6 4
9 7 Little Hollies
This copy has been produced specifically for Map Control Scheme purposes only. No further copies may be made Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown Copyright and may lead to prosecution or civil proceedings Reproduced from the Ordnance Survey map data with the permission of the controller of Her Majesty's Stationery Office Crown Copyright 2009 East Herts Council. LA Ref: 100018528 (
East Herts Council Address: Pearse House, Parsonage Lane, Bishops Stortford, CM23 5BQ Wallfields Reference: 3/13/0527/FP Pegs Lane Hertford Scale: 1:2500 SG13 8EQ O.S Sheet: TL5021NW Tel: 01279 655261 Date of Print: 30 July 2013 Page 77 This page is intentionally left blank
Page 78 Agenda Item 5d 5d 3/13/0901/FP – Erection of two-storey central archive building on site of demolished buildings P8 and P10 adjacent to northern site boundary, with modifications to road layout to interior of site, landscaping, installation of proposed earth ducts and other works for GlaxoSmithKline Services Ltd, Priory Street, Ware, SG12 0DJ
Date of Receipt: 28.05.2013 Type: Full – Major
Parish: WARE
Ward: WARE – ST MARY’S
RECOMMENDATION:
That planning permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:
1. Time limit (1T121)
2. Approved plans (2E103) – insert 5397/A3/201; 5397/A3/202; 5397/A0/300; 5397/A0/301; 5397 100; 5397 001; 5397 002; 5397 003; 5397 200A; GSK/S/354/1
3. Programme of archaeological work (2E025)
4. Tree and hedge retention and protection (4P055)
Directives:
1. Other legislation (01OL1)
2. Groundwater protection zone (28GP1, Musley Lane Pumping Station)
Summary of Reasons for Decision
East Herts Council has considered the applicant’s proposal in a positive and proactive manner with regard to the policies of the Development Plan (Minerals Local Plan, Waste Core Strategy and Development Management Policies DPD 2012 and the ’saved’ policies of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007); the National Planning Policy Framework and in accordance with the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2012 (as amended). The balance of the considerations having regard to those policies is that permission should be granted.
(3130901FP.MC)
Page 79 3/13/0964/FP
1.0 Background:
1.1 The application site is shown on the attached OS extract. It is an area of cleared land adjacent to the north boundary of the GSK site with Park Road. Two buildings (designated P8 and P10) that stood on the site were demolished approximately 5 years ago.
1.2 The whole GSK site is a designated Employment Area within the Local Plan and is reserved for general industrial, research and development and employment development.
1.3 The proposed building would be a two-storey structure with the main roof having a ridge height of 9.5 metres high, and the tallest element being approximately 10 metres high. The walls would mainly be timber clad with areas of white render and stone construction. The pitched roofs would be aluminium with the south-facing slopes covered in photovoltaic panels. There would be a flat roof over part of the ground floor to the south which would be planted to create a green roof.
1.4 The building would house four, mainly storage, functions currently located in separate areas throughout the site. Samples of manufactured products would be stored in the building, as would documents relating to GSK’s operations. The equipment maintenance team would be based in the new building, as would the site’s emergency response team and their equipment.
1.5 The building would incorporate photovoltaic panels, a ground-to-air heat exchanger and be connected to the site’s combined heat and power plant. The intention is to offset the CO 2 production associated with the ongoing use of the building through these means, resulting in a zero carbon building.
2.0 Site History:
2.1 The GlaxoSmithKline site has been the subject of a considerable number of applications. There have been no recent applications specifically relating to the application site itself.
3.0 Consultation Responses:
3.1 Affinity Water have advised that the application site is within the groundwater protection zone of Musley pumping station. A directive advising the applicant of their responsibilities is recommended.
3.2 Hertfordshire County Council’s Historic Environment Unit have reviewed Page 80 3/13/0964/FP
the submitted documentation and have confirmed that they have no objection to the proposed development. Although there would potentially be some impact on the remains of the Roman road that crosses the site, the constraints of the site affect the overall scheme, and the building has been sited to minimise the impact. There is potential for remains that have not been fully excavated to be harmed by the development, although the depth of the remains may be sufficient that no harm would result. The Historic Environment Officer is satisfied that this can be determined prior to construction beginning on site.
4.0 Town Council Representations:
4.1 Ware Town Council comments that they have no objection to the proposed development.
5.0 Other Representations:
5.1 The application has been advertised by way of site notice and neighbour notification.
5.2 No letters of representation have been received in response to the consultation.
6.0 Policy:
6.1 The relevant ‘saved’ Local Plan policies in this application include the following:
ENV1 Design and Environmental Quality ENV2 Landscaping SD1 Sustainable Development SD3 Renewable Energy EDE1 Employment Areas WA8 Employment Areas TR7 Car Parking – Standards
6.2 The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) is also material to the consideration of the application.
7.0 Considerations:
7.1 The proposed development involves the erection of a two-storey, 10 metre high building for purposes related to the ongoing operation of the site. The site is located within a designated Employment Area as Page 81 3/13/0964/FP
defined in the Local Plan where such development is considered acceptable in principle. The NPPF of course also provides policy support for developments which encourage economic growth in sustainable locations and officers consider that, in principle, this is a development which would accord with the policies of the Development Plan and with the key objectives of the NPPF. Significant weight should therefore be attached to these policy considerations.
7.2 The other main considerations in this case are the acceptability of the design approach and the impact of the building on the surrounding area and the amenities of neighbouring residents.
Design and Appearance
7.3 The ground area of the application site is set approximately 1 metre lower than the ground level of Park Road to the north. Any visual impact from the proposed development would be lessened by this difference in site levels.
7.4 The building would be a two-storey structure with a main roof of approximately 9.5 metres in height, a lower roof over the emergency response area, and a south-facing mono-pitched roof over the lift shaft to the north-east corner of the building.
7.5 The design of the building is of an industrial nature which reflects the nature of surrounding buildings and the character of the GSK site. Its scale and height is compatible with adjoining buildings.
7.6 The building would largely be screened from view in the surrounding area by the extensive boundary planting along the northern edge of the site. As such. It is considered to have a limited impact on visual amenity in the area. Furthermore, Officers consider the extent of the sustainability benefits involved in the construction and operation of the building to be a positive factor in the development’s favour.
Neighbour Amenity
7.7 The building would be sited to the immediate west of nos. 45 and 47 Park Road. It would be approximately 11 metres from the flank wall of no. 47. The building would be separated from no. 47 by boundary treatments and a footpath. Given these considerations, officers conclude that the building would not have a harmful impact on the amenities of the occupiers of these properties. It would also, in Officers’ opinion, not materially affect the outlook from the residential properties on the north side of Park Road. Page 82 3/13/0964/FP
7.8 Given the importance of the existing trees and other landscaping on the site in limiting the impact on neighbours and retaining an attractive street scene in Park Road, a condition is recommended requiring their protection and retention.
7.9 The building would not be used for manufacturing purposes. There would therefore be no additional harm arising from noise or fumes from the building. Adequate control over such matters is available through Environmental Health legislation in any event should any re-use of the building in the future necessitate any extraction equipment for example.
Other Matters
7.10 The development would not result in the loss of parking at the site, nor an alteration in the number of staff employed there. The internal road layout would be slightly altered in the vicinity of the building but this would have no impact outside the site. Officers consider therefore that there are no parking or highway safety concerns in relation to this proposal.
7.11 The site lies close to the partial remains of a Roman road, as well as some other known archaeological remains. A condition to require further archaeological investigation to ensure that the development would not result in unacceptable harm to these remains is recommended.
7.12 Earth ducts would be installed below the building to pre-heat or pre-cool air for internal ventilation purposes. These would be contained within the footprint of the building, and would not cause additional disruption beyond the building site.
7.13 Landscaping is proposed in the area around the site. This would not be particularly visible from outside the site, and so it is not considered necessary to require detailed submissions by condition. However, the retention of existing trees would safeguard the setting of the building.
8.0 Conclusion:
8.1 In conclusion, officers are satisfied that the proposed development would result in a sustainable form of development in compliance with the NPPF and the Local Plan and which would not be detrimental to the visual quality of the area or the amenities of neighbouring residents. It would be an appropriate development, making best use of previously developed land within this industrial site and would consolidate the economic benefits that the site brings to the town. Page 83 3/13/0964/FP
8.2 Given that the proposed building would be used for storage purposes there will be no detrimental impacts in terms of noise, air quality or traffic impacts and the inclusion of sustainable measures such as photovoltaic panels would also weigh in favour of the development and mitigate any environmental impacts from its construction.
8.3 Given these matters, and the presumption in favour of sustainable development, officers recommend that planning permission be granted for the proposed development subject to the conditions recommended at the head of this report.
Page 84
RC RC RC
C C C 6
2 C C C 2 8 3 8 7 9 7 7
5 2 6 1 7 7 7 7
44 9
1 1 1 59 4 7 5 7 7 47 5 56
3 56
1
6
0
9
7
6
5
D D D 4
D D D 5 8
DA DA DA
A A A
A A A 7 O O O
O O O
0 R O R O R O
5
R R R 8 1 6
R R R 6
S S S
50 S S S
S S S 5 N N N
N N N 6 7
N N N 6 O O O
7
O O O 2
ON ON ON 6
3
N N N 4 A N A N A N 6
A A A
A A A C C C 1 C C C 6
C C C 48
85
5
5
2 1
7 9
93
87
4 2
79
1
3 2
71 WWW
WWWAAA
6 3 AATATT 8 AATATTTTT 0 TTTTTOTOO OONON N
NN NR R R 51 47
R R OROAOAA 37
a OOO 7 AAA 9 DDD
AADADD 2
2 1 8
5
2
3
4 5 4 4 4
3 6 14
W 3 8
2 A
5 5 1 6
9 PH T
34
2
T 0
9 1 0 2
5
O 6
N 1
7
9
8
6 1 6
4 Tanks R a 27 O
A 2 4
9 1
9 1 8
2
3
D 9
NNTNTT 1
EEE 7 CCECENENTNTT EESESCSCECEE C C RCRERESESS EE EC C RCRR AAWAWWEE E SSHSHAHAWAWW El 41 AANANSNSHSHH
FFAFANANN
FFAFAA Sub 2 2
6 Sta
1 4
7 6 9
8 2 8
2 Watton House Cintel House 2 Hall
D D D
A D A D A D
AO D AO D AO D
AOR ORA AOR
OR RO OR
E E E
R R R
EN EN EN
ENO NOE ENO
T T T
NO ON NO
S S S
T T T
O O O
SD SD SD
T T T
A A A
SD DS SD
L L L
A A A
D D D
L L L
G A G A G A
L L L
G G G
D D D
G G G
D D D
3 A D A D A D
6 A A A
A A A O O O
1 O O O
O O O 6 R R R
R R R
R R R
E E E
E E E
N E N E N E
4 N N N 2
N N N 5 O O O
2 3
O O O 6 T T T O O O
T T T
S S S T T T 3 S S S
SD SD SD 1
D D D
1 A D A D A D
A A A o
L L L 7 t A A A
L L L
L L L G G G 1 1 G G G
2 0 G G G
1
4
3 a
3
3
3
3
82 a
4
3 1
Nelson Court
8 6
3 5 26 1 4 4
2 PH
5 66
6
9 7 84 80 54
9 4 3 to 1 96
AAADDD WWWAATATT PPPAAARRRKKK R R ROOOAAADDD WWWAATATTTOTOONNN PPPAAARRRKKK R R ROOOAAADDD AATATTTOTOONNN RRROOOAAADDD
ARK ROAD RRROOOAAADDD
P 5
2
o
t
9
1
4
5
7
1
o t
4 5 1 7
e
s e
u s
o u
h 27 o to 32 w h t l e r a
B
M 1
e
8 e
h h
t
T o T
2
6
Buryfield Maltings
5 2
7 1
6 o t B B B
B B B
BU BU BU
U U U
UR UR UR
R R R
RY RY RY
Y Y Y
Y F Y F Y F
F F F
F I F I F I E E E I I I E E E I I I E L E L E L L L L SITE LD LD LD
D D D
D D D W W W
W W W
W W W A A A
A A A
AY AY AY
Y Y Y
Y Y Y
Works
2
7
o
t
1
1 8 1
Telephone 1
1 Exchange Black Swan Tank
8
6 1
E E E E E E S E S E S E S S S S S S
LO LO LO LO LO LO LO LO LO H H H 3 H H H
HA HA HA
A A A
A R A R A R ILL ILLC ILLC C R R R ILL ILLC ILLC C R R R R R R Old Hall ILL ILLC ILLC C R R R M M M
RI RI RI M M M
S S S I I I M M M
S S S I I I
S' S' S' College
S S S ' ' '
S S S ' ' ' El
S S S
L L L Court L L L
A A A L L L Sub A A A
AN AN AN
N N N
N E N E N E Sta
E E E E E E 6 8 Works 5
7 2 24 1 26
Maplethorpe 12
1
O 4 l Court
The Malthouse 9
35
4 39
2 3
B u 1
5 r y f i e l d
T
e r r a c
e 1 PC
43
Pavilion
44
46 9
1 TTT 5 EEEETETT TTRTREREEEE S S TSTRTRR RRYRY YS S TSTT IOIOIRORYRYY PPRPRIROIOIO PPRPRR
This copy has been produced specifically for Map Control Scheme purposes only. No further copies may be made Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown Copyright and may lead to prosecution or civil proceedings Reproduced from the Ordnance Survey map data with the permission of the controller of Her Majesty's Stationery Office Crown Copyright 2009 East Herts Council. LA Ref: 100018528 (
East Herts Council Address: Glaxosmithkline Services Ltd, Priory Street, Ware, Herts, SG12 0DJ Wallfields Reference: 3/13/0901/FP Pegs Lane Hertford Scale: 1:2500 SG13 8EQ O.S Sheet: TL3514NW Tel: 01279 655261 Date of Print: 24 July 2013 Page 85 This page is intentionally left blank
Page 86 Agenda Item 5e 5e a) 3/13/0940/FP and b) 3/13/0941/LB – Alterations and change of use of two Class B1 office buildings to create 14no. 1 and 2 bed residential dwellings at Buildings 6 and 7, Bluecoats Avenue, Hertford, Herts, SG14 1PU for Bluecoats Joint Venture
Date of Receipt: 31.05.2013 Type: Full – Major
Parish: HERTFORD
Ward: HERTFORD – CASTLE
RECOMMENDATION:
(a) That, subject to the applicant or successor in title entering into a deed of variation in respect of the existing legal agreement previously agreed under LPA reference 3/12/1409/FP to include the additional financial contributions:
1. The provision of £504 towards primary, secondary and nursery education, youth care and libraries;
2. The provision of £1,146 towards outdoor sports facilities.
planning permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:
1. Three year time limit (1T121)
2. Approved plans (2E10) L900 P7, L500 P8, DPP 18257 11, A380 P0, A382 P0, A381 P0, L100 P2, L101 P0, L110 P1, L102 P8, L200 P1, L201 P1, L111 P1, M951 P0, M950 P0, L202 P1, M900 P0, M902 P0, M910 P0, M911 P0, M952 P1, M901 P0, A385 P0.
3. Prior to the first occupation of any dwellings hereby approved, details of all boundary walls, fences or other means of enclosure, including samples of materials where appropriate, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and thereafter shall be erected and retained in accordance with the approved details.
Reason: In the interests of privacy and good design, in accordance with policy ENV1 of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007.
4. Communal TV facilities (2E28)
5. Retention of parking space (3V20)
6. Landscape works implementation (4P13) – amend to ‘the approved details shown on drawing no. DPP 182 11 prior to the occupation of the Page 87 3/13/0940/FP and 3/13/0941/LB
flats hereby permitted.
7. Prior to the commencement of the development hereby permitted, details of the arrangements to be implemented to ensure the management and maintenance of any non-adopted common areas of the site, including the roads and parking areas, shall be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Once agreed, those arrangements, which may constitute the formation of a Management Company, shall be implemented prior to the first occupation of any of the dwellings hereby permitted and thereafter remain implemented in perpetuity unless alternative arrangements are submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
Reason: To secure the long term maintenance of the common areas and roads and in the interest of residential and visual amenity in accordance with policy ENV1 of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007
Directives:
1. Other legislation
2. Street Name and Numbering (19SN4)
Summary of Reasons for Decision
East Herts Council has considered the applicant’s proposal in a positive and proactive manner with regard to the policies of the Development Plan (Minerals Local Plan, Waste Core Strategy and Development Management Policies DPD 2012 and the ’saved’ policies of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007); the National Planning Policy Framework and in accordance with the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2012 (as amended). The balance of the considerations having regard to those policies and the planning permissions granted under lpa references 3/12/1409/FP and 3/13/0711/FO is that permission should be granted.
(b) The Director of Neighbourhood Services be authorised to GRANT listed building consent in respect of 3/13/1941/LB subject to the following conditions:
1. Listed Building - Three Year time limit (2E14)
2. Listed Building - new window (8L03)
Page 88 3/13/0940/FP and 3/13/0941/LB
3. Listed Building - new rainwater goods (8L09)
4. Listed Building - making good (8L10)
Summary of Reasons for Decision
East Herts Council has considered the applicant’s proposal in a positive and proactive manner with regard to the policies of the National Planning Policy Framework and in accordance with the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) (Amendment No. 2) Order 2012. The balance of the considerations having regard to those policies and the Listed Building Consent granted under lpa reference 3/12/1410/LB is that listed building consent should be granted.
______(094013FP094113LB.NB)
1.0 Background:
1.1 The site lies towards the north-east of Hertford as shown on the attached Ordnance Survey Plan. The existing buildings form part of a group of 8 former school dormitory buildings, which are predominately in office use.
1.2 To the North East and South East beyond Mill Road is the Tesco store and parking; to the North and South lie buildings 5 and 8 – both in office use, and to the West are Bluecoat buildings 1 - 4, which are also in office use. Vehicular access to the site is provided by Bluecoats Avenue to the West, accessed from the public highway off Mill Road to the north-eastern corner of the wider Bluecoats site.
1.3 Planning permission was granted for the change of use of the buildings from Class B1 office use to Class C3 residential, comprising 12 units with 18 parking spaces in March 2013, under lpa reference 3/12/1409/FP.
1.4 The current applications again seek permission for the change of use of the buildings to residential use, but now propose 14 units in the form of 1 and 2 bed residential dwellings. This increase in units would be achieved by the further internal subdivision of the buildings to create 2 additional 1 bedroom dwellings, one in each block, compared to the previous approval.
2.0 Site History: Page 89 3/13/0940/FP and 3/13/0941/LB
2.1 The relevant planning history for the site is as follows:-
2.2 Members will recall that authorisation was given at the July 2013 Development Management Committee meeting to approve the variation of the earlier approved plans in respect of landscaping agreed under LPA reference 3/12/1409/FP.
2.3 Planning permission and Listed Building Consent was originally granted under lpa references 3/12/1409/FP and 3/12/1410/LB for the change of use of these 2 buildings from Class B1 office use to Class C3 residential, comprising 12 units with 18 parking spaces.
2.4 Earlier applications, made under lpa references 3/11/0824/FP and 3/11/0825/LB, granted permission for the change of use of Buildings 7 and 8 to create 12. No 1 and 2 bed units. Following that permission, an occupier for building 8 for office use was found and this led to the application 3/12/1409/FP to change the use of building 6 instead of building 8.
2.5 The 8 dormitory buildings on Bluecoats were initially constructed for use as pupil boarding accommodation for Bluecoats School in the late 17 th Century. This use continued until the site was vacated by the school in 1985, and has since been re-occupied by office, commercial and sheltered housing uses.
2.6 Looking specifically at buildings 6 and 7, planning permission and listed building consent to change the dormitory buildings to Class B1 office use was granted under lpa references 3/85/1077/FP, 3/86/0420/RP and 3/85/1076/LB.
2.7 In the following years planning permission was granted on appeal in 1987 for the Tesco store on the schools former playing fields and the Mill Road link was constructed as part of this.
2.8 A single storey link between buildings 7 and 8 was granted under lpa references 3/95/1365/FP and 3/95/1306/LB.
2.9 There have been no other applications of relevance. However, an application for the change of use of the Gate House to the south west of the application site, within the former school site was granted permission for a change of use from B1 office to C3 dwellinghouse, under lpa reference 3/11/0165/FP.
3.0 Consultation Responses: Page 90 3/13/0940/FP and 3/13/0941/LB
3.1 Environmental Health has recommended a condition that relates to construction hours of working.
3.2 The Hertfordshire Constabulary has raised concerns regarding the fire escape provision at the rear aspect of each floor and in particular the internal doors that open up onto the staircases. They recommend that the doors are certified to LPS 1175 SR2 and any accessible windows should be certified to PAS 24:2012 standard and use 6.4mm laminated glass.
3.3 The Landscape Officer has recommended approval and indicated that the landscape details are acceptable and sufficient to discharge the condition placed upon the original approval.
3.4 The County Planning Obligations Unit has requested financial contributions towards local services and the provision of a fire hydrant on site.
3.5 The Conservation Officer has recommended approval. They have commented that the proposed internal demolition works would have a limited impact on the value of the heritage assets. The new internal works include partitions and infilling existing doors which would affect circulation, however would be reversible and would enable a long term viable use of the building. In summary the conversion of the units is considered to be acceptable and the treatment of the elevations would be in keeping with the character of the heritage assets.
3.6 English Heritage does not wish to comment on the proposal and recommend that the application is determined in accordance with national and local policy and on the basis of the Council’s expert conservation advice.
3.7 County Highways do not wish to restrict the grant of permission. They comment that the proposed change of use of the buildings from office space to 14 flats is unlikely to intensify the use of the site from a highways aspect. No new or altered vehicular access arrangements are proposed, however, the proposed parking setup is somewhat unclear. Section 1.4 of the Design and Access Statement states that “it is proposed to utilise 18 existing spaces by reassignment to the residential properties”, yet the introduction of the same document states that “reconfiguring the existing car park arrangement” will take place. At the current site the spaces marked numbers 14 to 18 on drawing number L500/P8 are tight to access, and only some of the parking spaces numbered 1 to 12 are currently in place. Nevertheless, from a Page 91 3/13/0940/FP and 3/13/0941/LB
highways aspect they have no objections given the central location of this development. If 18 properly accessible spaces are provided this is more than sufficient to ensure that the public highway is not adversely affected.
4.0 Town Council Representations:
4.1 Hertford Town Council objects to the change of use and loss of employment land.
5.0 Other Representations:
5.1 The applications have been advertised by way of press notice, site notice and neighbour notification.
5.2 No representations have been received.
6.0 Policy:
6.1 The relevant ‘saved’ Local Plan policies in this application include the following:
SD1 – Sustainable development SD2 – Settlement Hierarchy HSG1 – Assessment of unallocated sites for housing development TR1 – Traffic reduction in new developments TR7 – Car parking standards TR14 – Cycle facility provision (residential) EDE2 – Loss of employment sites ENV1 – Design and environmental quality ENV2 – Landscaping BH6 – New development in Conservation Areas IMP1 – Planning Conditions and obligations
6.2 The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) is also a material consideration in the determination of the application.
7.0 Considerations:
7.1 As already stated, planning permission was granted in March 2013 for the change of use of buildings 6 and 7 from Class B1 office use to Class C3 residential; comprising 12 units on the site. The considerations relating to the principle of the change of use, the loss of the existing employment premises on the site, neighbour amenity, highway safety and the impact upon the setting of the listed buildings Page 92 3/13/0940/FP and 3/13/0941/LB
and the conservation area have already been considered and accepted by the Council in principle. These are contained within the Officer report for the previous application which is attached as Essential Reference Paper A to this report.
7.2 The current proposal for 2 additional units (one in each block) requires consideration in respect of any additional impact that the increased density would have on neighbour amenity; highway safety, and the impact upon the setting of the listed buildings and the conservation area.
Neighbour Amenity
7.3 The immediate neighbouring buildings within Bluecoats Avenue are currently in office use, the nearest residential property being some 50 metres away to the south and within a similar distance to the west and north of the site are Bluecoats Court and Chauncy Court. Having regard to these distances, and as the majority of the operational works proposed would be internally within the building, Officers consider that the proposal would not have a harmful impact upon the amenities of neighbouring occupiers. Furthermore, the additional two residential units would not result in a substantial increase in activity at the site that would cause disturbance to the neighbouring properties.
7.4 The proposed development would therefore not result in an unacceptable impact upon the amenities of neighbouring occupiers.
Highway Safety and Parking
7.5 County Highways have confirmed that the proposed access and parking arrangements for the site are acceptable; although the size of some of the parking spaces is somewhat tight. 18 spaces are proposed for the 14 residential units, which is considered to be sufficient provision having regard to the sustainable location of the site close to the town centre and the bus and railway stations. The parking provision made on site has not increased with the additional two residential units. However, Officers do not consider that an increased provision would be necessary or justified in this case given the sustainable location of the site.
Setting of Listed Buildings and Conservation Area
7.6 The proposed additional two units involve some further internal alterations to the Listed Buildings, mainly comprising of additional partitions. The Conservation Officer has confirmed that they find the Page 93 3/13/0940/FP and 3/13/0941/LB
proposed works to the listed building to be acceptable. The proposed additional units would have a limited impact upon the historic and architectural value of the heritage assets and the change of use as a whole would facilitate the continued use of the buildings.
7.7 The removal of some of the extensive hard surfacing and the introduction of two internal soft landscaped amenity areas, will improve the character and appearance of the Conservation Area and have a positive impact upon the setting of the listed buildings. Officers have previously suggested that the existing fence to the eastern site boundary should be replaced with a red brick wall to further enhance the setting of the listed buildings and the Conservation Area. The applicant’s agent has verbally confirmed that they are willing to provide a new wall and therefore a condition is recommended for further details to be submitted in respect of this.
Other Matters
7.8 Officers understand that the financial contributions towards local services that were required as part of the previous permission granted for 12 residential units have already been paid. In accordance with Policy IMP1 of the Local Plan, additional financial contributions are required to those already paid to allow for the additional 2 residential units, as set out at the head of this report. The applicant has confirmed that they are willing to commit to entering into a deed of variation to the existing legal agreement in respect of these matters.
7.9 There is no requirement for affordable housing on this site as the proposal falls short of the Council’s threshold for affordable housing provision, which is 15 units or more as set out within Policy HSG3.
7.10 A condition was attached to the previous planning permission to require a landscape scheme to be submitted and agreed by the Planning Authority. A full landscape plan has now been submitted (Drawing No. DPP 182 11) and the Landscape Officer has confirmed that they consider this to be acceptable. Officers therefore consider that the previous condition to require a landscape scheme is no longer necessary, although one requiring its implementation prior to occupation is recommended.
7.11 A condition was attached to the previous listed building consent to require details of new doors to be submitted. These details have now been provided with the current application and are considered to be acceptable by Officers and therefore this condition is also no longer necessary. Page 94 3/13/0940/FP and 3/13/0941/LB
8.0 Conclusion:
8.1 The principle of the change of use of the existing buildings to residential use has been established with the previous permissions granted and there are no significant changes in circumstances or policy that would justify a different decision being made in respect of this. The impact of the proposed additional two residential units upon the surrounding area, in particular in respect of neighbour amenity, setting of the listed buildings and the conservation area and highway safety is considered to be acceptable.
8.2 It is therefore considered that the development complies with the relevant policies of the Local Plan and the NPPF and it is recommended that planning permission and listed building consent be granted subject to conditions and the applicant or successor in title entering into deed of variation in respect of the existing legal agreement previously agreed under LPA reference 3/12/1409/FP.
Page 95 This page is intentionally left blank
Page 96 Essential Reference Paper A a) 3/12/1409/FP and b) 3/12/1410/LB - Change of use of 2 no. Class B1 office buildings to create 12 no. 1 and 2 bed residential dwellings at 6 and 7 Bluecoats Avenue, Hertford for Bluecoats Joint Venture
Date of Receipt: a) 29.08.2012 Type: a) Full – Major b) 29.08.2012 b) Listed Building - Other
Parish: HERTFORD
Ward: HERTFORD – CASTLE
RECOMMENDATION:
(a) That subject to the applicant entering into a legal obligation pursuant to S106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to cover the following matters:
1. Provision to ensure that this permission is only implemented in place of, and not in addition to, the previous proposal, approved under ref 3/11/0824/FP. (Such that, if the earlier permission is implemented, this permission shall not be valid and if this permission is implemented, the earlier permission is revoked).
2. The provision of £5,454 towards primary education
3. The provision of £2,946 towards secondary education
4. The provision of £1,362 towards nursery education
5. The provision of £96 towards youth
6. The provision of £1,236 towards libraries
7. The provision of £7,651 towards outdoor sports facilities.
The Director of Neighbourhood Services be authorised to GRANT planning permission under ref 3/12/1409/FP subject to the following conditions:
1. Three year time limit (1T121)
2. Approved plans (2E10) ‘L100 P1, L101 P0, L500 P6, L900 P0, DPP1825711, A385 P0, L102 P0, L110 P0, L111 P0, L200 P0, L201 P0, L202 P0, M900 P0, M901 P0, M902 P0, M910 P0, M911 P0, M950 P0, M951 P0, M952, P0’ Page 97 a) 3/12/1409/FP, b) 3/12/1410/LB
3. Refuse disposal facilities (2E24)
4. Communal TV facilities (2E28)
5. Retention of parking space (3V20)
6. Prior to the commencement of the development, and not withstanding the details shown on the submitted plans, full details of both hard and soft landscape proposals shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. These details shall include, as appropriate: (a) Means of enclosure/boundary treatments (b) Hard surfacing materials (c) Minor artefacts and structures (e.g. furniture, play equipment, refuse or other storage units, signs, lighting) (d) Planting plans (e) Written specifications (including cultivation and other operations associated with plant and grass establishment) (f) Schedules of plants, noting species, planting sizes and proposed numbers/densities where appropriate (g) Implementation timetables. Thereafter the development shall proceed in accordance with the approved details.
Reason: To ensure the provision of amenity afforded by appropriate landscape design, in accordance with policies ENV1, ENV2 and ENV11 of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007.
7. Landscape works implementation (4P13)
8. Prior to the commencement of the development hereby permitted, details of the arrangements to be implemented to ensure the management and maintenance of any non-adopted common areas of the site, including the roads and parking areas, shall be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Once agreed, those arrangements, which may constitute the formation of a Management Company, shall be implemented prior to the first occupation of any of the dwellings hereby permitted and thereafter remain implemented in perpetuity unless alternative arrangements are submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
Reason: To secure the long term maintenance of the common areas and roads and in the interest of residential and visual amenity in accordance with policy ENV1 of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007. Page 98 a) 3/12/1409/FP, b) 3/12/1410/LB
Directives:
1. Other legislation
2. Street Name and Numbering (19SN4)
3. You are advised that in respect of Condition 6, Officers consider that the Mill Road boundary should be enhanced by an appropriately designed wall.
Summary of Reasons for Decision
The proposal has been considered with regard to the policies of the Development Plan (East of England Plan May 2008, Hertfordshire County Structure Plan, Minerals Local Plan, Waste Local Plan and East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007 and in particular SD1, SD2, HSG1, TR1, TR7, TR14, EDE2, ENV1, ENV2, BH6) and the National Planning Policy Framework. The balance of the considerations having regard to those policies is that permission should be granted. b) The Director of Neighbourhood Services be authorised to GRANT listed building consent in respect of 3/12/1410/LB subject to the following conditions:
1. Listed Building - Three Year time limit (2E14)
2. Listed Building - new window (8L03)
3. Listed Building - new door (8L04)
4. Listed Building - new plasterwork (8L05)
5. Listed Building - new rainwater goods (8L09)
6. Listed Building - making good (8L10)
Summary of Reasons for Decision
The proposal has been considered with regard to the policies of the Development Plan (East of England Plan May 2008, Hertfordshire County Structure Plan, Minerals Local Plan, Waste Local Plan and East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007), and in particular the National Planning Policy Framework. The balance of the considerations having regard to those policies is that listed building consent should be granted. Page 99 a) 3/12/1409/FP, b) 3/12/1410/LB
(140912FP.LP)
1.0 Background:
1.1 The site lies towards the north-east of Hertford as shown on the attached Ordnance Survey Plan. The existing buildings form part of a group of 8 former school dormitory buildings, which are predominately in office use.
1.2 To the North East and South East beyond Mill Road is the Tesco store and parking, to the North and South lie buildings 5 and 8 – both in office use. To the West are Bluecoat buildings 1 - 4, which are also in office use. Vehicular access to the site is provided by Bluecoats Avenue to the West, accessed from the public highway off Mill Road to the northeastern corner of the wider Bluecoats site.
1.3 The application seeks planning permission and listed building consent for the change of use of these 2 buildings from Class B1 office use to Class C3 residential, proposing 12 units with 18 parking spaces.
2.0 Site History:
2.1 The most recent history is LPA 3/11/0824/FP and 3/11/0825/LB, wherein permission was granted for the change of use of Buildings 7 and 8 to create 12. No 1 and 2 bed units. Following that permission, an occupier for building 8 for office use was found – hence this current application.
2.2 The 8 dormitory buildings on Bluecoats were initially constructed for use as pupil boarding accommodation for Bluecoats School in the late 17 th Century. This use continued until the site was vacated by the school in 1985, and has since been re-occupied by office, commercial and sheltered housing uses.
2.3 Looking specifically at buildings 6 and 7, planning permission and listed building consent to change the dormitory buildings to Class B1 office use was granted under LPA 3/85/1077/FP, 3/86/0420/RP and 3/85/1076/LB.
2.4 In the following years planning permission was granted on appeal in 1987 for the Tesco store on the schools former playing fields and the Mill Road link was constructed as part of this.
Page 100 a) 3/12/1409/FP, b) 3/12/1410/LB
2.5 A single storey link between buildings 7 and 8 was granted under LPA 3/95/1365/FP and 3/95/1306/LB.
2.6 There have been no other applications of relevance. However, an application for the change of use of the Gate House to the south west of the application site, within the former school site was granted permission for a change of use from B1 office to C3 dwellinghouse, under LPA 3/11/0165/FP.
3.0 Consultation Responses:
3.1 The Council’s Conservation Section have commented that the layout would ensure that the historic fabric and layout of the site remains and that the proposed landscaping and improvements to the boundary treatment on Mill Road would enhance the setting of the historic complex and as such raise no objections to the proposal.
3.2 The County Planning Obligations Unit has confirmed that financial contributions are sought for primary and secondary education, nursery education, youth and libraries.
3.3 Hertfordshire Highways have commented that they do not wish to restrict the grant of permission.
3.4 The Council’s Housing Section have not commented but previously stated that as the number of units proposed is 12 and as the site is not over 0.5 hectares, the applicant does not need to provide an affordable housing element.
3.5 The Council’s Environmental Health Section advise that any permission shall include conditions in respect of hours of working.
3.6 The County Historic Environment Unit have commented that the scheme is unlikely to have an impact upon significant heritage assets.
3.7 No comments have been received from the Councils Landscape or Waste Section .
4.0 Town Council Representations:
4.1 Hertford Town Council raise an objection and comment:-
‘Objections were raised to the change of use and the loss of employment premises.'
Page 101 a) 3/12/1409/FP, b) 3/12/1410/LB
5.0 Other Representations:
5.1 The applications have been advertised by way of press notice, site notice and neighbour notification.
5.2 One letters of representation has been received from a current tenant on the estate raising objections in terms of:
• The already high pedestrian traffic through the site, which will be increased by the proposal and result in potential to cause serious accidents; • Increased traffic movements with only one access point. No adequate measures to facilitate safe entrance and exit to the estate • Insufficient parking spaces and bays not accessible; • Asks Council to consider the listed status of the building, effect of waste and refuse and suitability of the drainage system.
6.0 Policy:
6.1 The relevant Local Plan policies in this application include the following:
SD1 - Sustainable development SD2 - Settlement Hierarchy HSG1 - Assessment of unallocated sites for housing development TR1 - Traffic reduction in new developments TR7 - Car parking standards TR14 - Cycle facility provision (residential) EDE2 - Loss of employment sites ENV1 – Design and environmental quality ENV2 - Landscaping BH6 - New development in Conservation Areas IMP1 – Planning Conditions and obligations
6.2 The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) is also of relevance.
6.3 In addition, the Council has relevant adopted Supplementary Planning Documents and Studies including:
• Affordable Housing and Lifetime Homes 2008 • Open Space, Sport and Recreation 2009 • Planning Obligations 2008 • Vehicle Parking Provision at New Developments 2008
Page 102 a) 3/12/1409/FP, b) 3/12/1410/LB
• Employment Land and Policy Review and Retail and Town Centre Studies, 2008 7.0 Considerations:
7.1 The main considerations in the determination of the planning application (3/12/1409/FP) relate to:
• The principle of residential conversion at the site and loss of B1 employment space; • Impact upon neighbour’s and future occupiers amenity; • Highway implications; • Impact upon the Conservation Area and setting of Listed Buildings; and, • Other matters
7.2 The main considerations in the determination of the listed building application (3/12/1410/LB) relate to:
• Impact upon the character and appearance of the Listed Building and their setting
Principle of development / Loss of employment
7.3 The site is located within the town of Hertford wherein policy SD2 of the Local Plan applies. This states that development will generally be concentrated in the main towns of the district, which includes Hertford. However the proposal would result in the loss of an existing employment site and one that was last in employment use. Policy EDE2 part a), states that in such situations, planning permission will only be permitted where the retention of the premises for employment use has been explored fully without success, evidence of which must be provided.
7.4 The application has been submitted with a Marketing Report. This outlines that the office accommodation across the wider Bluecoats site has been marketed and offered as a whole or in part from late 2007. Such marketing has, and still does, include prominent 'to let' advertisements boards at the main Bluecoats entrance and to the Mill Road side of the site, a mailing exercise to around 1050 companies and organisations within East Herts District and neighbouring Authorities; details of the buildings are recorded on the EGI Commercial Property Website and 3 other such websites; and details recorded on the then (2007) joint agents website (Davies & Co and Lambert Smith Hampton) - though more recently now solely Davies and Co; and a colour brochure has been produced. Page 103 a) 3/12/1409/FP, b) 3/12/1410/LB
7.5 In terms of building 6, the ground and first floor became vacant in March 2012 and the second floor in September 2011. For building 7, this became vacant in September 2011, with the occupier re-located within one of the 6 remaining office buildings in Bluecoats. Overall within the wider Bluecoats complex, there is vacant accommodation at building 4 - second floor, building 5 – ground and first floor and, of course, the application site at building 6 and 7 are vacant on all three floors.
7.6 There have been significant rental incentives of short term leases offered and the buildings are being offered at competitive local market rates, and yet the buildings remain largely vacant. Responses back from potential occupiers who have viewed the premises comment that they do not provide for open plan space and that there are limited disabled facilities. In accordance with part a) of policy EDE2, I am satisfied that the retention of the premises for employment use has been explored fully without success.
7.7 The previous application for change of use from office to residential at buildings 7 and 8 accepted the justification for the loss of some employment at Bluecoats. However, Officers do not consider that there is justification for the cumulative loss of 3 of the employment buildings, and therefore it is recommended that the legal agreement reflect this and have a mechanism to ensure that the previous permission (which included the use of Building 8) is not also implemented.
Impact upon neighbour’s and future occupier’s amenity
7.8 In respect of the impact on neighbours’ amenity, due to the internal layouts of the buildings, and the relationship with the neighbouring properties – currently in office use, there would be no unacceptable impact to neighbours from overlooking, loss of light or similar.
7.9 With regard to the levels of amenity that the development will provide for future occupiers, I am satisfied that the layout of the scheme maintains appropriate distances between adjoining buildings with acceptable internal layout of rooms and relationships with parking and amenity areas, to result in an acceptable degree of amenity being achieved.
Highway matters
7.10 As confirmed by Herts Highways, there are no objections in principle to the proposed development which makes use of the existing car parking and access from the public highway. It is noted that the proposal could Page 104 a) 3/12/1409/FP, b) 3/12/1410/LB
well result in a reduction in traffic movements, particularly given the sustainable location close to the town centre, other local amenities and public transport. 7.11 Internally the vehicle turning areas are acceptable and in respect of parking, the 18 spaces for the 12 dwellings is considered acceptable and generally in line with the Councils parking standards, which outlines that the maximum space provision to be 16.5 spaces. Although there is an over provision, the spaces are existing on site and the layout does reduce the amount of hard surfacing around the building and given that the over provision is slight, it is considered acceptable in this case.
Impact upon the Conservation Area / character and appearance of Listed Buildings and their setting
7.12 In terms of the impact on the listed buildings and their setting, the amended plans would ensure that the historic plan form of the buildings is retained with no loss of historic fabric. Furthermore, the proposed treatment of elevations is in keeping with the character of the building and overall the development would be sympathetic to the character and appearance of the buildings and their setting.
7.13 The removal of some of the extensive hard surfacing and the introduction of two internal soft landscaped amenity areas, together with a condition to secure improvements to the Mill Road boundary treatment (currently unattractive fencing which harms the setting of this listed group), will improve the character and appearance of the Conservation Area and have a positive impact upon the setting of the listed buildings. It is considered that these improvements are necessary and reasonable and should be secured by planning condition. This accords with national planning policy which seeks to ensure that development proposals improve the setting of heritage assets where possible, as set out in the NPPF.
7.14 The residential use can be achieved satisfactorily with no requirement for additional boundary division that would disrupt the pattern of the site and harm the setting of this important town group.
Other matters
7.15 In terms of S106 matters, Officers consider that, in order to satisfactorily mitigate for the impact of the new residential development, financial contributions would be needed towards open space provision (children and young people and outdoor sports facilities); primary education; secondary education; nursery education, youth and library services. The proposal has been assessed in the light of Reg.122 of the Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations (2010), and it is considered Page 105 a) 3/12/1409/FP, b) 3/12/1410/LB
that such contributions meet the relevant tests in the legislation. Furthermore, and as outlined in Para 7.7 above, it is also considered necessary to have a mechanism in the legal agreement to ensure that the previous consent cannot be implemented in addition to this permission.
7.16 There is no requirement for affordable housing, (as per Policies HSG3 and HGS4) as the site does not propose 15 or more dwellings nor is it over 0.5 hectares. The proposal is for 12 dwellings (or 13 if including the recent approved conversion of the Gate House to the south). This number is considered to provide a comfortable layout of units within the listed buildings.
7.17 A request for affordable housing would, however, be triggered if other buildings within the Bluecoats site were converted to residential, as the threshold taken cumulatively with this application and that approved at the Gate House, would be exceeded. This is further justification for ensuring that this permission can only be implemented in place of and not in addition to the earlier permission ref 3/11/0824/FP (which included permission to convert Building 8).
8.0 Conclusion:
8.1 To conclude, I consider that the principle of residential development is accepted at this site and that the retention of the premises for employment use has been explored fully without success.
8.2 The scale and layout of the dwellings is sympathetic to the listed buildings and the development would not create an adverse impact upon the amenity of neighbours or future occupiers, nor would it create an adverse highway safety impact. The design and layout of the scheme has had regard to the opportunities for improving the character and quality of the area and enhancing the significance of the heritage asset. The proposal has been considered with regard to the policies of the Local Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.
8.3 The balance of the considerations having regard to those polices is that planning permission and listed building consent should be granted subject to the legal obligations and conditions set out at the commencement of this report.
Page 106
1
3 0 1 1 13
3 5 B S t o
8 5 12 to 1 86 t ron terf Wa The
El Sub Sta
The Waterfront
C C C C C C CRCRCR R R R RORORO O O O 7 OSOSOS 7 S S S to SISISI 4 IEIEIE 7 IEIEIE
ERERER
R R R
R R R 1 8 3
P P P 1
P P P
PLPLPL t 1
L L L o 2 0 6 3 LALALA 1 A A A ACACAC 3 C C C 4
CECECE
E E E
4 1 3 E E E 2 1 3
4 8
1
3 EETETT
EETETT 1 EEE 2 EEE 8
TTRTREREE
S S TSTRTRR 1
TTT 1
YY YS S S 2 6
rt S S S 1
u AAYAYY 8
AAYAYY 1 o WWW 3 AAA 0
C ILILIWLWW
's AAIALILIL 5
AAIAI I 1 3 n RRR 2 h 4 Jo RRARAA St
M M M M M M MI MI MI IL IL IL 3 IL IL IL LLLLLL 4 L L L
L L L
R R R
R R R 1
RORORO 0
O O O 6 3
O O O
1 A A A 2
t A A A
o
ADADAD 1 Presby 9 D D D 73 D D D 2 to 2 62 3 6 3 4 Church T T T
T T T
OOO
1 T T T 0 OOO 4 OWOWOW 2 WWW
S S S
0 7 WWN WN N
S S S 9
STSTST 3 N N N T T T 2 NSNSNS
Hertford East S S S 1 T T T Childrens Nursery
J J J SHSHSH
J J J H H H
6 O O O 9 J J J HEHEHE 1
O O O 8 E E E
o OHOHOH ENENEN 2
t H H H N N N
HNHNHN NDNDND 1 N N N Station D D D
N'N'N' D D D 5 'S'S'S 'S'S'S S S S S S S
S S S STSTST 5
T T T TRTRTR 2 R R R RERERE E E E EEEEEE E E E 3 ETETET 4 T T T T T T a S S S Hall S S S STSTST TRTRTR TRTRTR RERERE 3 E E E EEEEEE 4 E E E 8 ETETET 4 T T T
0 T T T 2 5
5 0 2
1
o 9
t
7
1
5 1
AVA 4 DDVD
DADVAD
4 DADAD
o 2
t
4
9 6
4
2 V V V
V V V
o VIVIVI
t L L L
2 I I I
Works 5 L L L I LI LI L
2 L L L 5 L L L
LILILI 4 IEIEIE
IEIEIE
ERERER
1 R R R 1 RSRSRS S S S S S S S S S S S S STSTST T T T El Sub Sta 4 TRTRTR 4 R R R MMM to RERERE MMIMI I 35 E E E MMIMTITIT 3 EEEEEE TTRTRR 8 E E E ITITRITRR ETETET RREREE T T T EE EC C C T T T C C OCOO OOUOUU UURURR
RRTRTT TTT 3 TTT 4 4 to 3 1
23 4 1 1 Supermarket 0 7 22 8
b 4 1
3
8 t
o a 6 3 Norris 21 1
6
4 7
t
d o
2 Works 0 n urt
a o 1 to 12 4 C PPP cy H 5 n PPRPRR , au PPRPRIRI I Ch e RRROOO 3 r IOIOIO , t I I IRRR f OORORR 2 o
RRYRYY ,
YY Y 1 r
SSS d
YY Y 4
SSS 5
TTT t o
SSS TTRTRR 4 M
TTRTRR 9 C EEE 5 4 RRR e
EEEEEE 2d h 2
EEE
t t
EETETT u
6
EEE o h TTT 1
r o
o
TTT t 9
c 8 1 9 Sherwood d 2c h rt i House ou s C t 5 iers Vill Priory
4 17
Court 1
P t 5 o 1 i o
2 1 n b H e 5 e Princess a E 7 r l RRRE l AARARR
Mary WWWAARARRE 4 WWW 2 Cambridge a House House e 9 s u o h lt e 3 a m 7 o M B B B 7 H B B B e t BLBLBL SITE BBB h s L L L BBB T e LULULU BIBIBI U U U IRIRIR R UEUEUE IRIRIR E E E RRCRCC ECECEC CCC C C C CHCHCH COCOCO
HHH Prince O O O 1
HHEHEE OAOAOA
EEE A A A 3 ERERER ATATAT 0 RRR T T T L L L S S S RRR of Wales T T T L L L S S S LELELE S S S EEE A A A EYEYEY YYY A A A Y Y Y House AVAVAV C C C V V V C C C VEVEVE CCOCOO E E E OOO ENENEN OUOUOU N N N UUU NUNUNU UURURR U U U
RRR UEUEUE
RTRTRT E E E B B B
T T T E E E B B B 2
T T T BABABA 6
1 A A A
7 AKAKAK
K K K
o KEKEKE
t
E E E
R R R
E E E 2 6 1 R R R a 8
R R R to
Garden Centre S S S 1 2 S S S 2 2 STSTST 7 T T T
9 Queen TRTRTR
6 R R R 1 RERERE 1 8 E E E WWW Alexandra EEEEEE WWW E E E WWW ETETET El a a a T T T a a a r r r T T T a a a 3 n rr rr rr House to rr rr rr T T T p e e e T T T t m Sub r r r o a enenen ETETET 8 H enenen 2 E E E BluecoatBluecoatBluecoat Court Court Court e n n n EEEEEE us
P P P E E E BluecoatBluecoatBluecoat Court Court Court o
Sta P P P RERERE BluecoatBluecoatBluecoat Court Court Court H PlPlPl 6 lalala R R R TRTRTR
laclaclac T T T
acacac STSTST
e e e 4
c c c 3 S S S 4
e e e 5 S S S 1 e e e 1 4 a
45 Salisbury Bluecoats AAYAYY LLWLWWAAYAYY House
AAIALILIWLWW House LLL 1
RRARAIAII RRR 2
Bank 1 WRVS
PH S S S S S S
SO SO SO
5 O O O 1 O U O U O U U U U UT UT UT T T T H H H
T T T H H H
H H H
5 S S S
0 S S S
ST ST ST T T T R R R T T T R R R R E R E R E E E E EE EE EE E E E 9 3 T T T 2 E E E 1 12 T T T T T T 43 Yeoman'sYeoman'sYeoman's Yeoman'sYeoman'sYeoman's
The Sanctuary House
10 Marquee 1
4 CourtCourtCourt 2 8 1
CourtCourtCourt 2
9 1
t 1 o
8 8
o 9
3 t 6 2 7 07 ed
1 7 R PH Providence to ish 05 rit 1 e e B ety Place Th Th oci
an ss S 3 sm ro port C S ) (PH
6 117
89 1 ws Me 85 Bridewell 95 13 1 15 Peck 1
4 House 1 1 1 Stag
5 House
1
4
9 1
0
9 3
8 t
o
1
Surgery 4 4
1
1 3
97 6
W 7 1
7 3 o 2 OOO r 3 OOO k 9 OLOLOL s LDLDLD LDLDLD
1 D D D
9 1 L L L
3 L L L 0 LOLOLO OOO ONONON NNN Garage NDNDND DDD
DODODO
3 OOO
8 1 ONONON
1 NNN 6 N N N R R R R R R
W RORORO
OOO
1 OAOAOA Fire and Ambulance
o 1 AAA r 1 4 ADADAD k 7 7 DDD B s 6 DDD Station a 9 n 6 k
63
1
5 1 6 2
51 61 PH 1
1
45 to 59 0
0 108
o 5 1 t 5 0
41 49 6
1
0
43 4
1 0
TTT 2
EEEETETT Bank
RREREETTT 1
TTRTRREEE 0 S S TSTRTREREE 0
OORORERE ES S TSTT
FFFRREREE 9 8
OOO 9 R 6
FFOFOROR
9
0 t
o
8
8
8
6
9 9
2 1 8 4
8 2 8 P o DDD s AADADD
P P P t OOAOADADD o o o 1 P P P s s s RROROAOAA o o o O
P Pt Pt t s s s RROROO
o o o t O t O t O
s s s f RRR f f f 1 t O tf O tf O f f Hotel 6 i i i Of Oc f Oc f c i Telephone f f f i e i e i e c f c f c f c f f f KKK i e iWe iWe W c c c e RRKRKK e WeaWeaW a
l l l AARARKRKK W aWk aWk a k 2 PPP l l l AARARR a k a( k a( k ( P P P PPP l l l AAA k ( ka( ka( a P P P PPP t t t ( a( a( a P Ph Ph h t ) t ) t ) a h a h a h t ) t ) t ) h h h Exchange ) ) ) 1
3 1
5 4
5 PC k ar r P YYY a AAYAYY C WWWAAA y EE EW W W
re NNENE EW W W LLL 6 o YYNYNENEE LLOLOO st OOYOYNYNN LLOLONONN
lti OOYOYY 15 to 26 OONONDNDD u SSCSCOCOO NNDNDODOO 2 M AASASCSCC DDODONONN 2 AASASS OONON N 1 GGAGAA NN NR R R GGG R R OROO OOAOAA AADADD DDD
1
4
2 4
1
23 The Heathers 3
Sorting 2 8 5
GGG GGWGWW Office WWWYYY YYNYNN Longmore NNNNNN NNSNSS SS SW W W W W W WWAWAA Teachers' AALALKLKK LLKLKK Centre
27
2 7a 1 Abel Smith Primary School
3 SSS Almshouses 3 HHSHSS 2 PPHPHSHSS LLPLPHPHH LLPLPP 3 UULULL GGUGUU G GU GUU EE GE G G HHEHE E TTHTHEHEE TTHTHH TTT 1 10 3 This copy has been produced specifically for Map Control Scheme purposes only. No further copies may be made Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown Copyright and may lead to prosecution or civil proceedings Reproduced from the Ordnance Survey map data with the permission of the controller of Her Majesty's Stationery Office Crown Copyright 2009 East Herts Council. LA Ref: 100018528 (
East Herts Council Address: Buildings 6 & 7, Bluecoats Avenue, Hertford, SG14 1PU Wallfields Reference: 3/13/0940/FP Pegs Lane Hertford Scale: 1:2500 SG13 8EQ O.S Sheet: TL4317 Tel: 01279 655261 Date of Print: 24 July 2013 Page 107 This page is intentionally left blank
Page 108 Agenda Item 5f 5f 3/13/0922/FO – Variation of Condition 3 (LPA ref 3/11/1103/FP) – 'The use of the Aisled Barn and the conservatory at Dane Tree House for wedding ceremonies and receptions hereby permitted shall cease on or before two years after the date of decision' to allow the date to be extended until 14/09/14 at The Henry Moore Foundation, Dane Tree House, Perry Green, Much Hadham, SG10 6EE for The Henry Moore Foundation.
Date of Receipt: 29.05.2013 Type: Variation of Condition – Major
Parish: MUCH HADHAM
Ward: MUCH HADHAM
RECOMMENDATION:
That planning permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:
1. Three year time limit (1T12)
2. Approved plans (2E10) (1141/SD/100, 1141/PD/200)
3. The use of the Aisled Barn and the conservatory at Dane Tree House for wedding ceremonies and receptions hereby permitted shall cease on or before 14 th September 2014.
Reason: To enable an accurate assessment to be made of the impact of the development on highway safety and the amenities of neighbouring occupiers.
4. The car parking areas as indicated on Plan No. 1141/SD/100 shall only be used in conjunction with the use of the Aisled Barn and the conservatory of Dane Tree House hereby approved. The car parking areas pursuant to this condition shall be permanently maintained as soft landscaped areas, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
Reason: In the interest of the openness and rural character of the site and its surroundings, in accordance with the saved policies GBC3, ENV1 and ENV2 of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007.
Summary of Reasons for Decision
East Herts Council has considered the applicant’s proposal in a positive and proactive manner with regard to the policies of the Development Plan (Minerals Local Plan, Waste Core Strategy and Development Management Policies DPD 2012 and the ’saved’ policies of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review Page 109 3/13/0922/FO
April 2007); the National Planning Policy Framework and in accordance with the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2012 (as amended). The balance of the considerations having regard to those policies and the permission granted under LPA reference 3/11/1103/FP is that permission should be granted.
(092213FP.NB)
1.0 Background:
1.1 The application site is located within the Rural Area Beyond the Green Belt as designated within the Local Plan, within the settlement of Perry Green as shown on the attached OS extract.
1.2 The application site is part of the wider Henry Moore Foundation (HMF) site which comprises a large area of agricultural land, woodland and a number of residential and other buildings which accommodate a museum, studio, gallery and storage spaces. These areas are open to visiting members of the public. The application site itself, which is situated adjacent to the Grade II* Listed Building known as Hoglands, is occupied by Dane Tree House in the east of the site and the Aisled Barn to the west. The remainder of the site is open gardens and woodland which is used to exhibit sculptures by the late Henry Moore. There is an access track which runs along the northern and western boundary of the site which leads to the Aisled Barn. There is existing car parking adjacent to Dane Tree House and the Aisled Barn which could accommodate approximately 16 vehicles. It should also be noted that there is vehicular access from the main track to the adjacent field to the west which the applicant has indicated is occasionally used as overflow parking for up to 84 vehicles. There are mature trees and hedgerows along the boundary of the site which screens the exhibits and other buildings from the surrounding area and there are no changes proposed to the landscape features within the site.
1.3 In September 2011 planning permission was granted for the change of use of the Aisled Barn to a mixed use comprising an Art Gallery (Use Class D2) and wedding ceremony/reception (sui generis) use and the change of use of the conservatory in Dane Tree House from Office use (Class B1) to a mixed use of office and wedding ceremony/reception (sui generis) use. This permission was granted subject to a condition which required the use to cease 2 years after the date of the decision, which is in September 2013. The current proposal is to vary this condition to enable the use of the site for weddings to continue for another 1 year period.
Page 110 3/13/0922/FO
1.4 It should be noted, as was the case with the previous approval that the outdoor gardens would also be used in association with the wedding ceremony/reception use and the field within the western part of the site would be used intermittently for car parking associated with the mixed uses of the Aisled Barn and Dane Tree House.
1.5 It was previously indicated that the HMF had used the Aisled Barn, the conservatory at Dane Tree House and the surrounding gardens intermittently for weddings for 6 to 7 years prior to the submission of an application to formalise this use. The HMF aim to continue their existing temporary use of these two buildings for wedding ceremonies and receptions for up to 180 guests and have stated that they intend to limit the number of weddings to a maximum of 12 per year. The existing use of the two buildings for an Art Gallery and B1 Offices would continue alongside the proposed sui generis use.
2.0 Site History:
2.1 The relevant planning history for the site is as follows:
2.2 Planning permission was granted, for a temporary period of two years, for the use of the Aisled Barn to a mixed use comprising of D1 Art Gallery and wedding ceremony/reception (sui generis) use and the change of use of the conservatory in Dane Tree House comprising of B1 Office and wedding ceremony/reception (sui generis) use in September 2011 under LPA reference 3/11/1103/FP.
2.3 Planning permission was granted for an extension to the existing W.C. and kitchen at Dane Tree House together with the provision of new car parking under LPA reference 3/88/1480/FN. More recently planning permission was granted for internal modifications to Dane Tree House and extension of the existing building to provide entrance space and environmentally controlled store room (LPA Ref: 3/00/0743/FP). There was also planning permission granted on the site for the rebuilding of a barn (LPA Ref: 3/80/1346/FP), which is now known as the Aisled Barn.
3.0 Consultation Responses:
3.1 County Highways do not wish to restrict the grant of permission and have commented that the proposal is not likely to have an impact from a highway point of view as the applicant intends to limit the number of weddings to twelve per annum.
Page 111 3/13/0922/FO
4.0 Parish Council Representations:
4.1 Much Hadham Parish Council object to the planning application as they feel that there is no justifiable reason for relaxing the condition unless a proper assessment has been undertaken.
5.0 Other Representations:
5.1 The applications have been advertised by way of press notice, site notice and neighbour notification.
5.2 2 representations have been received which can be summarised as follows:
• The use has generated noise disturbance from music during the evening celebrations which last until midnight;
• Noise disturbance has also been experienced due to increased traffic before an after the events, guests in the grounds, occasionally guests wandering into the lanes at night and taxi drivers trying to find their passengers;
• The proposal should not be considered in isolation to more extensive plans that the HMF has for development at the site. Due to visitor numbers. Associated traffic volumes generated by the existing and pending applications it would seem imperative that the applications are considered simultaneously;
• There should be a restriction on the number of ceremonies and receptions to no more than 12 per annum and a curfew of midnight;
6.0 Policy:
6.1 The relevant ‘saved’ Local Plan policies in this application include the following:
GBC3 Appropriate Development in the Rural Area Beyond the Green Belt ENV1 Design and Environmental Quality ENV2 Landscaping ENV24 Noise Generating Developments TR7 Car Parking - Standards
6.2 In addition, the following sections of the NPPF are of relevance: Page 112 3/13/0922/FO
Section 3 – Supporting a prosperous rural economy Section 11 – Conserving and enhancing the natural environment Section 12 – Conserving and enhancing the historic environment.
Considerations:
7.1 The key considerations in the determination of this application are as follows:
• The principle of the development and the impact of the continued change of use upon the character of the Rural Area; • The impact of the continued use on the amenities of local residents; • Highways/ access considerations; • The impact of the proposal on the setting of the nearby listed building.
Principle of Development
7.2 The application site is situated within the Rural Area Beyond the Green Belt wherein permission will not be given for the construction of new buildings or for changes of use other than for those purposes as specified within policy GBC3. The proposed change of use would not fall within one of the specified developments or uses as outlined in the policy, thereby forming a departure from the Local Plan.
7.3 Section 3 of the NPPF states that local plans should support sustainable growth and expansion of all types of business and enterprise in rural areas, both through conversion of existing buildings and well designed new buildings and support sustainable rural tourism and leisure developments that benefit businesses in Rural Areas.
7.4 The application site forms part of the wider Henry Moore Foundation site which undertakes a range of activities including the storage of artwork, research centre, gallery and museum exhibitions. This attracts a number of visitors, including school groups, during the open season from April to October. Whilst the proposed use does not strictly fall within those uses that are listed as appropriate in the Rural Area by policy GBC3, Officers consider that the proposal for the re-use of an existing building for this rural enterprise complies with the aims of the NPPF for sustainable economic development rural locations.
7.5 The applicant has indicated that they intend to limit the number of Page 113 3/13/0922/FO
weddings to a maximum of 12 per year. It is understood that the site has been used for occasional weddings for 6-7 years previous to the approval of the temporary change of use in 2011. Officers consider that the use of the site for up to 12 weddings a year would not result in such an intensification of the use of the site which would have any significant harm to the character of the Rural Area.
7.6 It is noted that the existing car parking within the site would be utilised and whilst the continuation of the use for weddings may lead to an increased use of the western field for overflow parking, having regard to the fact that the proposals do not include the hard surfacing of this area, Officers consider that the openness of this part of the site would be maintained. However, in the interests of the openness and the rural character of the site and its surroundings it is considered that a condition should be imposed to ensure the car parking is used in conjunction with the mixed uses of Dane Tree House and the Aisled Barn only and that it should not be hard surfaced without the permission of the Local Planning Authority.
7.7 It is therefore considered that the proposal would enable the diversification of a locally significant rural resource, supporting the local rural economy in accordance with the aims of the NPPF. Furthermore, the continuation of the use would not in itself result in a level of activity that would be detrimental to the openness and rural character of the site and its surroundings.
The impact of the proposed change of use on the amenities of local residents
7.8 It is acknowledged that the use of the Aisled Barn and the conservatory at Dane Tree House for wedding ceremonies and receptions is likely to generate some additional noise and activities within the site. However, the Foundation has intermittently held wedding receptions for the past 6 or 7 years and the Council is not aware that the previous use of the buildings has resulted in an unacceptable intensification of the existing use of the site or increased noise, disturbance or vehicles movements to a significant extent.
7.9 Dane Tree House and the Aisled Barn are situated within the wider Henry Moore Foundation site which comprises large area of open fields, gardens and non-residential buildings. As such, the parts of the site where the proposed mixed uses take place are situated over 60 metres away from the nearest residential properties known as Gildmore and Muirfield to the east and 100 metres to Bourne Cottage to the south and other neighbouring dwellings to the north. Furthermore, the application Page 114 3/13/0922/FO
site is well screened by mature trees and landscaping which screen the existing buildings from the surrounding area.
7.10 A temporary planning permission was originally granted for the wedding use(s) to enable the use to be trialled and for an assessment to then be made in respect of the impact of the use upon the character of the area and the amenities of neighbouring occupiers.
7.11 No representations were received from local residents in respect of the previous planning application approved for the temporary change of use. However, two representations have now been received from a neighbouring resident in respect of the current application. These representations state that they have experienced noise disturbance generated by music from the evening celebrations and due to increased traffic.
7.12 The Council’s Environmental Health Department have confirmed however that they have not received any complaints from local residents in respect of noise and disturbance caused at the site. The HMF has sought advice from Environmental Health and use a decibel meter, which would enable music to be cut of automatically if a specified noise level is reached. Furthermore, it is considered that the proposed activities associated with the mixed use would be subject to extra control under the Licensing Act 2003 in terms of late night music, entertainment and food/refreshments.
7.13 Whilst the representations received from local residents have been noted, there is no evidence available to demonstrate that the existing temporary use has resulted in unacceptable noise and disturbance to neighbouring residents. Both of the representations received raise concerns in respect of the noise disturbance caused by evening music. The playing of music can be controlled through the Licensing Act and Officers consider that this would be the appropriate legislation, together with the Council’s controls through Environmental Health legislation, to ensure that the playing of music and any other noise disturbance caused is controlled to an acceptable level.
7.14 In respect of the disturbance caused by increased traffic, based upon the applicant’s aims to limit the number of weddings taking place to 12 per annum and as the permission would be extended by just 1 year, Officers do not consider that this would cause unacceptable harm to the amenities of residents.
7.15 It is therefore considered, having regard to the distance to nearby neighbouring properties and the applicants intention that the use of the Page 115 3/13/0922/FO
premises would occur for no more than 12 weddings a year that the proposed continuation of the use would for an additional 1 year period would not adversely impact upon the amenities of nearby residential occupiers to a degree that would justify the refusal of the current proposal. Furthermore, as stated above, there is other legislation that can be used to limit any noise and disturbance associated with the use.
Highways/ access considerations
7.16 It is noted that County Highways do not wish to restrict the grant of permission; however their written comments do specifically refer to the applicant’s intentions to hold no more than 12 weddings a year. Officers have subsequently discussed this matter with the Highways Engineer who has confirmed that, as the use is only for a further 1 year period, they would not wish there to be a condition imposed to also restrict the number of weddings that takes place. Having regard to these comments Officers do not consider it to be necessary to restrict the permission to the number of weddings that can take place per annum.
7.17 The concerns that have been raised by the neighbouring resident in respect of visitor numbers and traffic volumes associated with this and other proposals that the HMF have for the site have been considered. As the current proposal is to extend the existing permission by just one further year, it is unlikely that any further planning applications made for development at the site, if approved by the Council, would be constructed and ready for occupation within this time period. Furthermore, without the benefit of an application to consider in respect of other works to the site, the current application must be determined upon its own merits.
7.18 Officers maintain that there would be a reasonable level of car parking for this type of development; there is existing vehicular access of acceptable standard and traffic generation will not be likely to impact upon highway safety and capacity.
The impact of the proposal on the setting of the nearby listed building
7.19 It has been noted that the application site is situated adjacent to the Grade II* Listed Building known as Hoglands, which is the former home of the late Henry Moore and is now used as a museum. Whilst it is acknowledged that this building and its setting has historic significance, it is considered that the proposed change of use would not result in the creation of additional development or an increase in activities that would be detrimental to the setting of the listed building. Page 116 3/13/0922/FO
7.0 Conclusion:
7.1 In summary, it is considered that the extension to the approved temporary use for the site for weddings is acceptable for a further temporary period of 1 year. The continued use for 1 year would not be detrimental to the openness and rural character of the site and its surroundings. It is also considered that the proposal would not be likely to result in a level of activity or noise disturbance that would be significantly harmful to the amenities of nearby residential occupiers and there would be sufficient access, parking and service arrangement to sufficiently accommodate the continued use.
7.2 Officers consider that it is necessary and reasonable in this case to restrict the continued use to a period of just 1 year to enable any further evidence available after this time in respect of noise and traffic generation to be assessed.
7.3 The application is therefore recommended for approval subject to the conditions set out above.
Page 117 This page is intentionally left blank
Page 118
Kirkstalls 5
Church of St Thomas
Old School House
Sunnycroft
Blewins
Bu s ck y ler r w s r o C e ot d tage a s M
e T M 1 hree
Ca 2 stles Bucklers Hall Farm Th H e aven Bucklers Croft
k c t u f e d o g r e s l a c t e d t e l l d o d p u a C p P e A B
Foxley
eld gfi rin Sp ee ytr a e Bucklers Hall B dg Brook Cottage Lo
Foxglove Cottage
se ha e c Th
Peregrine
North View
The Shieling
Orchard House The Chase
Longfield Cottage
Elmwood
White he T ls Cottage re au L ld fie re in a m T s a J t u n st he C
Ash Tree Cottage
Dane Tree House Yew Tree Cottage
Hoglands Aisled Barn re The Hoops ildmo Inn G (PH) ld e fi ir u M
Yellow Brick New Studio Sheep Bungalow
Field Barn
Bourne Maquette Studio
Bourne Cottage SITE
Perry Bushes
Clovers
Badgers Bend
Hopshill Mount
Ashbourne
Fayrness Pp Ho
BOBOBO BOBUOBRUORUR B BUBUNUN N OUORUORUERE E RNRENR ELN EL L N N LNA LN ALNAN E E AEA EAE E LALNALENAENE NENENE St Lenette Mary's
St Anne
This copy has been produced specifically for Map Control Scheme purposes only. No further copies may be made Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown Copyright and may lead to prosecution or civil proceedings Reproduced from the Ordnance Survey map data with the permission of the controller of Her Majesty's Stationery Office Crown Copyright 2009 East Herts Council. LA Ref: 100018528 (
East Herts Council Address: Dane Tree House, Perry Green, Much Hadham, SG10 6EE Wallfields Reference: 3/13/0922/FO Pegs Lane Hertford Scale: 1:5000 SG13 8EQ O.S Sheet: TL4317 Tel: 01279 655261 Date of Print: 24 July 2013 Page 119 This page is intentionally left blank
Page 120 Foxley
eld gfi rin Sp ee ytr Ba e dg Lo
Foxglove Cottage
se ha e c Th
Peregrine
North View
The Shieling
Orchard House The Chase
Longfield Cottage
Elmwood
e White h T ls re Cottage u a L ld fie re in a m T s a J
t u tn s e h C
Ash Tree Cottage
Dane Tree House Yew Tree Cottage
Hoglands Aisled Barn ore The Hoops dm Gil Inn (PH) ld e fi ir u M
Yellow Brick New Studio Sheep Bungalow
Field Barn
Bourne Maquette Studio
Bourne Cottage SITE
This copy has been produced specifically for Map Control Scheme purposes only. No further copies may be made Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown Copyright and may lead to prosecution or civil proceedings Reproduced from the Ordnance Survey map data with the permission of the controller of Her Majesty's Stationery Office Crown Copyright 2009 East Herts Council. LA Ref: 100018528 (
East Herts Council Address: Dane Tree House, Perry Green, Much Hadham, SG10 6EE Wallfields Reference: 3/13/0922/FO Pegs Lane Hertford Scale: 1:2500 SG13 8EQ O.S Sheet: TL4317 Tel: 01279 655261 Date of Print: 24 July 2013 Page 121 This page is intentionally left blank
Page 122 Agenda Item 5g 5g 3/13/0813/OP – Development of site to provide 13 family dwelling houses with associated car parking and landscaping – Land to North of Park Farm Industrial Estate, Ermine Street, Buntingford
Date of Receipt: 03.06.2013 Type: Full – Major
Parish: BUNTINGFORD
Ward: BUNTINGFORD
RECOMMENDATION:
That subject to the applicant or successor in title entering into a legal obligation pursuant to Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to cover the following matters:
• A financial contribution towards Nursery, Primary and Secondary Education, Childcare, Youth and Library services to Hertfordshire County Council in accordance with the residential type and mix as approved in any subsequent planning application and the Planning Obligations Guidance – Toolkit for Hertfordshire 2008;
• A financial contribution towards Sustainable Transport to Hertfordshire County Council in accordance with the residential type and mix as approved in any subsequent planning application and the Planning Obligations Guidance – Toolkit for Hertfordshire 2008;
• A financial contribution towards Outdoor Sports facilities to East Herts Council in accordance with the residential type and mix as approved in any subsequent planning application and the Planning Obligations Supplementary Planning Document 2008;
That planning permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:
1. Outline permission time limit (1T03)
2. Approved plans (Site location plan; SK2)
3. Details of the access, appearance, landscaping, layout, and scale, (hereinafter called "the reserved matters") of the development shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before any development begins and the development shall be carried out as approved.
Reason: To comply with the provisions of Article 4 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) Order 2010. Page 123 3/13/0813/OP
Directives:
1. Other Legislation (01OL1)
2. Planning Obligation (08PO)
Summary of Reasons for Decision
East Herts Council has considered the applicant’s proposal in a positive and proactive manner with regard to the policies of the Development Plan (Minerals Local Plan, Waste Core Strategy and Development Management Policies DPD 2012 and the ’saved’ policies of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007; the National Planning Policy Framework and in accordance with the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2012 (as amended). The balance of the considerations having regard to those policies and the pre-app advice given is that permission should be granted. (081313OP.SE)
1.0 Background:
1.1 The application site is shown on the attached OS extract. It is situated to the north of Buntingford town centre, but within the settlement boundary as set out in the Local Plan. The application site is 0.49 hectares in size and comprises a vacant greenfield site which fronts Ermine Street.
1.2 The site is bordered to the south and west by the existing Park Farm Industrial Estate, which was developed under planning approval 3/86/1960/FP. This industrial estate is formed of one and two storey units used for the purpose of light and general industry. To the north of the site is number 7 Ermine Street, which is a residential dwelling and garden. The boundaries of the site are generally well landscaped with mature landscaping including trees.
1.3 This application seeks permission in outline form for the construction of 13 residential dwellings on the site. All detailed matters have been reserved. The application originally included access details, but these are also now to be dealt with as a reserved matter. Despite the status of the application, the applicant has submitted material which shows a potential layout and house types for the site. These details are being considered as illustrative.
Page 124 3/13/0813/OP
2.0 Site History:
2.1 Park Farm Industrial Estate was developed under LPA ref: 3/86/1960/FP. There is no recent planning history on this site.
2.2 An outline planning application has been received for the redevelopment of the site of no. 7 Ermine Street (to the north of the application site) for the construction of up to 7 dwellings with associated car parking and landscaping (ref. 3/13/1294/OP). This application is due for determination by 12 September 2013.
2.3 Proposals have also come forward for the development of land further north, this time outside of the town development boundary. These proposals comprise conventional and sheltered housing, a care home, extension to the adjacent school playing fields and the potential for a hotel.
3.0 Consultation Responses:
3.1 Planning Policy has commented that the proposal is for 13 dwellings on land allocated for live/work units and employment purposes. The proposal is therefore contrary to saved policies BUN6 and EDE1 of the East Herts Local Plan 2007.
3.2 The policy team refers to the requirement to ensure that the need for employment land has been thoroughly tested before it is released for other uses. Whilst there appears to be no interest in this site for that purpose, developers considering sites elsewhere in the town have indicated that there may be scope to include employment land in their schemes. This seems to be at odds then with a case of lack of demand here. If a residential use is permitted, it would be necessary to ensure there is an acceptable relationship between it and the commercial uses to the south and west.
3.3 The team acknowledge that the Council is unable to demonstrate a 5 year supply of land for housing, but considers that this site will not have a material impact in that respect.
3.4 With regard to affordable housing, the team note that the site is only just below the threshold size for provision. It is considered that this is an attempt to avoid the policy requirement for the provision affordable housing given the applicant owns land adjacent to the site. The team refers to the current circumstances in relation to capacity at schools in the town.
Page 125 3/13/0813/OP
3.5 The Crime Prevention Design Officer at Hertfordshire Constabulary has commented that Government guidance states that applications should demonstrate how crime prevention measures have been considered in the design of the proposalF.and how the design reflects the attributes of safe, sustainable places set out in ‘Safer Places’. The Officer is concerned that the architect and agent have not demonstrated how this issue is being addressed. Some particular plot related concerns are referred to.
3.6 The Hertfordshire Biological Records Centre (HBRC) have recommended that if development does not start within 12 months, then the site should be fully surveyed for reptiles and existing log piles assessed as potential hibernacula. They also recommend that if reptiles are found to be present a Compensation Plan will be needed; any site clearance must only be conducted during the period October – February; bird and bat boxes should be erected post development and post development landscape planting should consist of native species.
3.7 Natural England have commented that the ecology survey submitted with the application has not identified that there will be any significant impacts on statutory protected sites, species or on priority Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP) habitats as a result of the proposal. However when considering this application the Council should encourage opportunities to incorporate biodiversity in and around the development. Examples of biodiversity enhancements are: green/ brown roofs; landscaping; nesting and roosting sites; sustainable urban drainage systems (SuDS); and local wildlife sites.
3.8 The Council’s Engineers have commented that the site is situated within flood zone 1 and there is no historic flood incidents recorded for the site. They state that the development shows a net increase in the amount of impermeable areas being created with consequent increase in the risk of associated flooding to the surrounding areas and residences and potential increase within the development. They state that in order to improve the sustainable construction characteristics of the development they would recommend to make use of ‘above ground’ SUDS drainage systems such as external/garden rain harvesting water butts, swales, green roofs, permeable paving and grey water recycling/internal rainwater harvesting.
3.9 The Environment Agency has commented that they have no flood risk concerns on this site that can not be dealt with through their Flood Risk Standing Advice. As the development is in Flood Zone 1 and is under a hectare, surface water management good practice should be applied.
Page 126 3/13/0813/OP
3.10 Environmental Health has commented that they do not wish to restrict the grant of permission subject to conditions relating to construction – hours of working – plant and machinery; soil decontamination and piling works.
3.11 County Highways does not wish to restrict the grant of permission subject to conditions relating to reserved matters approval for visibility splay; junction radii/alignment/gradient and road widths; vehicle parking; wheel washing facilities; parking and storage of and delivery of materials within the site; cycle storage facilities; and the approval of a Construction Traffic Management Plan. They commented that there is no highway objection to the principle of additional houses in this location. Initially concern was raised in relation to the detail of the access arrangements. This is now to be dealt with as a reserved matter.
3.12 The Planning Obligations Officer, HCC has stated that based on the information to date for a development of 13 dwellings, financial contributions would be sought towards First/Primary education (£29,883); Middle education (£27,804); Upper Education (£31,711); Nursery education (£5,339); Childcare (£2,266); Youth (£897); Libraries (£2,899).
3.13 The Spatial and Land Use Planning Minerals and Waste Team, HCC have commented that regard should be had to the policies of the Hertfordshire County Council Waste Core Strategy and Development Management Policies Development Plan Document 2012.
3.14 Thames Water have commented that it is the responsibility of the developer to make proper provision for surface water drainage and that with regard to sewerage infrastructure they do not have any objections to the application.
3.15 The Council’s Landscape Officer has recommended consent be granted and has expressed no strong objection to the principle of the removal of trees, although some should be retained, if possible. Elsewhere in his response he indicates that it would be highly desirable to retain some frontage trees and that, without the retention of one or two trees adjacent to the southern boundary of the site, the replacement planting would not seem to do much to screen the adjacent industrial unit. If the frontage trees are removed, space needs to be allowed for compensatory planting. There is no objection to the principle of the development.
Page 127 3/13/0813/OP
4.0 Town Council Representations:
4.1 The Buntingford Town Council comments that the land was allocated in the East Herts Local Plan 2007 as mixed use and therefore the principle of development is already established. The Town Council has no objections to the proposed change of use but would ask that these proposals are considered in the wider context of the future development within Buntingford.
4.2 The site is situated at the point where the 30mph speed restriction on Ermine Street ends. The Town Council recommend that consideration is given to continuing the restricted speed limit to the north of the site, although it is understood that there is a possibility of further development in this area which would require a further extension of the limit.
4.3 The Arboricultural Report refers to two category B Poplar trees on the south west corner of the site. The Town Council would ask that these trees are retained, which it is believed that the developer has stated would be possible. Additionally the Habitat Survey recommends that any work is carried out outside of the breeding season and any tree lines that are removed should be replaced elsewhere on the site, these items should be included as conditions of planning permission.
4.4 The Foul Drainage Assessment states that the proposed development would be served by a 150mm diameter pipe which runs south along Ermine Street to the junction with the High Street, where it becomes a 225mm diameter pipe. It is assumed that Thames Water has made allowance for this site as it has been allocated for development since 2007. The Town Council would ask that Thames Water investigate fully and confirm that the 150mm pipe is capable of serving this development, especially in light of the fact that an additional 11 dwellings have been sited to the south of Park Farm Industrial Estate on Woods Way.
5.0 Other Representations:
5.1 The application has been advertised by way of press notice, site notice and neighbour notification.
5.2 Two letters of representation have been received which raise the following comments:
• Overlooking and loss of privacy to garden of neighbouring Page 128 3/13/0813/OP
residential property; • Impact on future development possibilities of no. 7 Ermine Street; • Removal of existing trees should be kept to a minimum; • All contractors working at the development should not park or cause hindrance in front of private residences on Ermine Street during the construction period.
5.3 A letter of concern has also been received from a planning agent representing the current occupants of no. 7 Ermine Street. It is noted that the occupants of this neighbouring dwelling are currently in the process of submitting a formal outline planning application for residential development of this neighbouring property. The letter raises similar concerns to those specified above, and also raises concerns with regard to lack of clarity of the current proposal and the need for further control through conditions of approval.
5.4 Buntingford Civic Society has raised concern that another application is put forward to build houses in Buntingford in the absence of a District Plan or consistent with EHC publication ‘Everyone Matters – A Sustainable Community Strategy for East Herts 2009 to 2024. The Civic Society continue by stating that BTC/BARD/CofC/BCS have published a core strategy for development in the town which is the genesis of a Neighbourhood Plan and it is impossible to comment meaningfully on outline planning applications in isolation from numerous other applications in the pipeline. To the community each of these applications to date appear to be ‘premature’ and certainly not sustainable in the absence of a wide range of infrastructure improvements. They comment that at this stage the Buntingford Civic Society considers that the application should be dismissed.
6.0 Policy:
6.1 The relevant ‘saved’ Local Plan policies in this application include the following:
SD2 Settlement Hierarchy HSG1 Assessment of sites not allocated in this Plan HSG7 Replacement dwellings and infill development EDE1 Employment Areas EDE2 Loss of Employment Sites TR2 Access to new developments TR7 Car parking standards ENV1 Design and environmental quality ENV2 Landscaping Page 129 3/13/0813/OP
ENV3 Planning Out Crime – New Development ENV11 Protection of Existing Hedgerows and Trees ENV16 Protected Species ENV25 Noise Sensitive Development BUN1 Housing allocations – Buntingford BUN6 Park Farm Industrial Estate
6.2 The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) is also of relevance to the consideration of the application.
7.0 Considerations:
7.1 As indicated, this application has been submitted in outline form. Initially, details of access were provided as part of the submission. Following the response from the Highway Authority, this element has also been removed from the matters to be considered at this stage. The proposals comprise therefore a wholly outline application. Despite this, material has been submitted showing a potential layout of dwellings on the site and the style and design of those potential properties. This material is being considered as illustrative only. The applicant has confirmed that the site size is 0.49ha.
7.2 The determining issues in the consideration of this application are:
• The principle of development and loss of land for employment purposes; • Highways; • Visual Impact; • Layout and design; • Impact on residential amenity; • Section 106 obligations; • Impact on protected species
Principle of development and loss of employment
7.3 The site lies within the built up area of Buntingford wherein there is no objection in principle to development. However, Policy BUN6 of the Local Plan allocates the site for employment, split into two areas. An area which is reserved primarily for industry comprising B1 and B2 uses in accordance with policy EDE1, and a smaller area to the east fronting Ermine Street which is reserved for live/work units.
7.4 As this proposal is for residential development and not a development of live/work units or B1/B2 use, it is contrary to policies EDE1 and BUN6 Page 130 3/13/0813/OP
of the Local Plan. It is therefore necessary to consider whether there are any material considerations in this case which would warrant a departure from these policies.
7.5 The applicant has stated that the site has been vacant for thirteen years. There has been no firm interest to develop the site for employment or live/work accommodation despite the marketing of the site since 2007. The site was extensively marketed between 2007 and 2008, active marketing stopped on the advice of the agents as the sale prospects were poor. The site has recently been actively marketed again, and across this entire period, the site has remained available for sale, with local employers aware of its presence even when not actively marketed. No firm interest has materialised at all over this period.
7.6 Set against this apparent lack of demand, planning policy Officers refer to the ongoing preparation of the Councils District Plan that will guide development in the period to 2031. It is anticipated that it will be necessary to accommodate some residential development in the town of course and that it will generate a need and demand for additional employment provision. The case is that short term decisions now should not be made which may preclude longer term objectives.
7.7 This position is recognised. The Councils current position is that its District Plan is likely to be released in a draft form prior to the end of this year. That will need to go through a period of public consultation and examination before significant weight can be attached to it. In advance, development proposals are coming forward. Some of these may, speculatively at this stage, contain an element of employment related development. What is crucial however, is how much confidence be given to these speculative proposals turning into reality. That again will depend on the strength of the market. Given these uncertainties, it is considered that the weight that can be assigned to this longer term objective cannot be significant at this stage.
7.8 In this respect, regard must also be had to guidance contained within the NPPF. Para 22 of the NPPF states that “planning policies should avoid the long term protection of sites allocated for employment use where there is no reasonable prospect of a site being used for that purpose. Land allocations should be regularly reviewed. Where there is no reasonable prospect of a site being used for the allocated employment use, applications for alternative uses of land or buildings should be treated on their merits having regard to market signals and the relative need for different land uses to support sustainable local communities”.
Page 131 3/13/0813/OP
7.9 In support, the applicant also identifies that the scheme will deliver some housing going some way toward meeting the short fall that the Council currently faces in this regard. Its contribution will clearly be modest, 13 units. However, it is considered that some positive weight can be assigned to this matter, albeit modest.
Highways
7.10 As set out earlier in this report, the detailed matter of access has been removed from this application and will now be dealt with as a reserved matter. County Highways have confirmed that there is no highway objection to the principle of additional houses in this location. There was initial concern in relation to the detailed specification of the access. Whilst this element of the scheme has now been withdrawn from current consideration, it would appear that the ability to achieve an acceptable access here, with regard to its specification, is not in doubt.
7.11 Reference has been made to the development proposals that have already been submitted in relation to the site at 7 Ermine Street, immediately to the north of the application site. An access to that property is already in existence. If the proposals at no 7 are supported, then its use would be intensified, as the proposals at that site are also in outline form for up to 7 units. The limited scale of the developments are such that the inter-relationship of the accesses is not considered to be unacceptable.
7.12 In addition, proposals are being formulated for land to the north of the town development boundary which have been canvassed publically. Whilst a more significant form of development, access to that site is sufficiently distant not to be affected by a decision that may be made here.
Visual Impact
7.13 The Council’s Landscape Officer has not raised any formal objection in principle to development on the site. The existing site is well landscaped, especially the Ermine Street frontage, and therefore views into the site are generally restricted. The Arboricultural Report submitted with the application has assessed the existing trees on the site with the majority being classified as Category C trees – trees of low quality and value but with a life expectancy of more than 10 years. It is proposed to remove all of the existing trees on the site. The submitted Report states that the overall quality of the tree stock is so poor that removal and replacement is considered to be the most appropriate approach and will allow the implementation of a comprehensive and Page 132 3/13/0813/OP
coherent landscaping scheme which will better serve the interests of amenity in the longer term.
7.14 The loss of the trees on the site is regrettable, and clearly the removal of all of them would not be the most favourable outcome anticipated by the Landscape Officer when submitting his response. Both the applicant and the Landscape Officer suggest that a replacement planting scheme would be of greater value in the longer term. This is acknowledged, given the scale of development proposed, it does appear that the ability to achieve any level of significant replacement planting, must be somewhat limited.
7.15 The site is identified for development and any alternative proposals which may have come forward – employment or live/ work units – would have the potential to have the same impact on existing trees on the site, in principle. However, it remains the case that any development scheme could endeavour to accommodate more of the existing planting on the site to assist with its assimilation. It is considered that the impact of the scheme as it stands is a harmful one in relation to this matter. Some negative weight must be assigned in this regard.
Layout and Design
7.16 As previously stated, this application seeks permission for the redevelopment of the site with all matters reserved. Therefore, the detailed matters of appearance, layout, scale, landscaping and access are all reserved. The application is accompanied by an illustrative site layout and elevations of the proposed dwellings seeking to demonstrate how 13 dwellings could be provided on the site. Officers do have some concerns in relation to these details, however, those matters will be considered in detail as part of any future reserved matters application.
7.17 Officers are however satisfied that the site can accommodate 13 dwellings with sufficient space available for access, turning, parking and landscaping, albeit not significant. The grain and layout of development and the scale and design of dwellings in the vicinity of the application site is varied, and it is considered that an appropriate dwelling layout and design can be achieved that would be appropriate to and respect the character and appearance of the surrounding area. The concerns raised by Herts Constabulary Officers would be appropriately considered at the detailed stage.
Impact on residential amenity
7.18 Some concerns have been raised in relation to the impact of the Page 133 3/13/0813/OP
development on the amenity of the occupiers of land to the north, 7 Ermine Street. In that respect, the impact can be considered against the current circumstances, where there is a single dwelling on that site, and a potential future situation where more intensive residential development may have come forward on that site also.
7.19 In relation to the first of these the development proposed is likely to result in an impact on the amenity of the occupier of no 7. Residential development will be introduced into the site immediately to the south of that property. However, it is considered that a layout of development can be achieved that will ensure this impact is not greater than that which would be reasonable. New planting in garden areas of the proposed dwellings will assist with this, of course.
7.20 In the latter case, given that both development proposals are currently in outline form, establishing the nature and extent of the impact with any certainty is difficult. However, with the creation of two new higher density residential environments, the expectations of occupiers will be such that some inter-relationships between the properties will be anticipated. Again, it is considered that a layout can be achieved where 13 units on this site and up to 7 on the land to the north can be achieved with acceptable relationships between them. Whilst there is some scope for amenity impact then, this is not considered to be of such an extent that it should be assigned harmful weight.
7.21 The Park Farm Industrial Estate is adjacent to the south and west of the site. Due to the nature of activities that occur on the industrial estate (B1 and B2 uses) it is anticipated that the future occupiers of the proposed development may experience some noise and disturbance. The situation to the west is less sensitive in that there exists a substantial landscaped belt and there is currently no development immediately proximate on the Park Farm site. The industrial units are closer to the south. However, they face away from the residential development site and the relationship is no closer than that which has been accepted previously in relation to the development at Woods Way. Officers are satisfied that any noise and disturbance experienced would be limited and would not preclude residential development on this site. It is noted that the Council’s Environmental Health Team have not raised any objections to the development on these grounds.
Affordable Housing
7.22 The site area is just below the 0.5ha threshold site area size for the provision of affordable housing (at 0.49ha) and the comments from policy officers are noted in relation to the ownership of the adjacent Page 134 3/13/0813/OP
land. However, the only location where site expansion could take place, to the west, is an area which accommodates an existing landscaped strip. Therefore this is not an area on which it would be considered desirable to locate development. As a result it is considered acceptable, all other matters being satisfactory, to allow the site to proceed in the absence of affordable housing provision.
Section 106 Obligations
7.23 The number of dwellings proposed is above the number required to trigger the requirement for planning obligations in accordance with the Council’s Planning Obligations SPD and the Herts County Council (HCC) Planning Obligations Toolkit. HCC have confirmed that they will require contributions towards primary, middle, upper and nursery education, childcare, youth and library facilities. Whilst the County Council have set out figures related to these contributions, these were based upon an indicative number of bedrooms per dwelling. Officers however consider that contributions towards these services are necessary and reasonable based on pressures that the development will place on existing infrastructure, and they are therefore considered to meet the tests set out in S122 of The Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations (CIL) 2010.
7.24 With regards to Highways contributions, the Planning Obligations SPD and policy TR8 require that, where new developments generate a need for new parking provision that a contributions of £500 (index linked) per vehicular parking space be made towards sustainable transport schemes and traffic calming/ safety enhancement measures in the vicinity of the site.
7.25 The Planning Obligations SPD identifies that, for a development of this scale, that contributions are required to accommodate the demand placed on: Parks and Public Gardens; Outdoor Sports Facilities; Amenity Green Space; Children and Young People.
7.26 Taking into account the requirements of the Planning Obligations SPD and deficiencies in open space, Officers consider that a financial contribution towards open space is considered to meet the tests set out in Section 122 of The Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations (CIL) 2010.
Protected species
7.27 An extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey supported the application. It concluded that that the site is unlikely to support protected species and Page 135 3/13/0813/OP
recommends potential ecological enhancements such as native species within landscape schemes and the installation of bird boxes. Both Natural England and the Hertfordshire Biological Records Centre concur with these findings. For these reasons this proposal accords with policy ENV16 of the Local Plan.
8.0 Conclusion:
8.1 The site is located within the settlement of Buntingford where the principle of development is acceptable. Although the site was allocated for live/ work use in the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007, the marketing of the site for this use has been unsuccessful and it has remained vacant and undeveloped.
8.2 Whilst there may be potential for greater demand for employment provision in the future, the scale and timescale of this is currently unknown. Given that, the guidance in the NPPF and the modest ability of the site to play a part in housing land supply, it is considered that a scheme of residential development can be supported.
8.3 Whilst some negative weight is assigned due to the proposed approach to the existing trees on the site, namely the removal in entirety, the scheme is considered acceptable in all other respects, or there are no other matters to which harmful weight is applied. As a result, it is considered that the beneficial aspects of the proposal are such that Officers recommend that planning permission be granted, subject to the signing of a Section 106 agreement and planning conditions.
Page 136
SITE
7 2
3 The 3
3 Lodge
5
3
1 41 3
5
o
t
5 2
5 39 2 3
2
40 3 7 38 22 2
8
4 2
7 7
11
2
2 1 YYY 1 7 AAAYYY W WWAAA SSS W WW 3 DDDSSS 3 4 OOODDD WWWOOOOOO WWW 13
3 17
R RROOOA 16 AAAGGGEEE R RROOO CCCAAARRRAAAGGGEEE VVVIICICCAAA
1 1
29
Lane End The Vicarage 2 7 23 2 Southgate House EEE
IIVIVVEEE Swimming RRRIIVIVV 2 DDDRRR 8 House NNN D DDRRR MMMAAANNN Pool EEEMMM 1 EEE 1 FFFRRREEE 0
FFFRRR 2
2
1
3
2 1
EEE 1 3 IIVIVVEEE 1 RRRIIVIVV DDDRRR 4 D DD 1 NNN AAANNN MMMAAA MMM EEE FFFRRREEE EEE FFF TTTSSS C CCLLLOOOSSSEEE
YYYLLLOOOTTTTTTSSS C CCLLL 4
AAAYYYLLLOOO 1 1
AAA 1 3 2
1
8
1
1 8 PPP PPPOOO
7 OOORRR 1
7 RRR 1 TTT TTTEEE EEERRR RRR 1 SSS PH 0 SSS 0 C CC CCCLLL LLLOOO OOOSSS
SSS
a EEE
9 7 EEE
4 1
15 1
Hall 2 CCC 5
CCC HHH 6
BBB HHH HHH 1 BBB EEE OOO EEE OOO QQQ 9 OOO QQQ 6 WWW 1 QQQ WWW UUU LLL UUU LLL EEE EEE III IIVIVVEEE EEE INININ IIVIVV RRR NNN RRRIII RRR D DDRRR SSS 18
GGG NNN D DD 1 SSS
GGG AAANNN SSS AAA 5
G G G MMMAAA GGG MMM 1
GGG EEEMMM RRR RRREEE 1 RRR FFFRRR EEE FFF EEE EEE EEE SSSEEE
EEE LLLOOOSSS
NNN CCCLLLOOO NNN 2 CCCLLL CCC
L L L
LLL AAA 8 AAA NNN NNN EEE 2 EEE 2 7 8
05 4 6 1
4 4
6
3
0 1 This copy has been produced specifically for Map Control Scheme purposes only. No further copies may be made Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown Copyright and may lead to prosecution or civil proceedings Reproduced from the Ordnance Survey map data with the permission of the controller of Her Majesty's Stationery Office Crown Copyright 2009 East Herts Council. LA Ref: 100018528 (
East Herts Council Address: Land to North of, Park Farm Industrial Estate, Ermine Street, Wallfields Buntingford, Herts Pegs Lane Reference: 3/13/0813/OP Hertford SG13 8EQ Scale: 1:2500 Tel: 01279 655261 O.S Sheet: TL3530 Date of Print: 30 July 2013 Page 137 This page is intentionally left blank
Page 138 Agenda Item 5h 5h a) 3/12/1955/FP and b) 3/12/1956LB – Demolition of the existing outbuildings and renovation of the former Victorian School. Development of the former school playground and outdoor space for 5no 4 bed dwellings and 2no 2 bed flats at Musley Infant School, Musley Hill, Ware SG12 7NB for Musley Hill Development Ltd
Date of Receipt: a) 09.11.2012 Type: a) Full – Minor b) 09.11.2012 b) Listed Building – Other
Parish: WARE
Ward: WARE – TRINITY
RECOMMENDATION:
a) The Director of Neighbourhood Services be authorised to GRANT planning permission under planning ref: 3/12/1955/FP subject to the following conditions:
1. Three year time limit (1T12)
2. Approved plans (2E10) – 1299 PL01; PL02; PL03 G; PL04 A; PL05 A; PL07 A; PL08 A; PL09 B; PL10 B
3. Prior to the occupation of any of the residential units hereby approved, the listed school building, the Fives Court and the existing railings to the north and west sides of the school building shall be fully repaired and refurbished in accordance with a scheme to be first submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
Reason: To ensure the satisfactory development of the whole site and to ensure the historic and architectural character of the building is adequately restored in accordance with Policy ENV1 of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007.
4. Hard Surfacing (Roads, Driveways) (3V21)
5. Boundary Walls and Fences (2E07)
6. Approved accesses only (3V04)
7. Pedestrian visibility splays (2.0m x 2.0m) (3V10)
8. Provision and retention of parking spaces (3V23)
9. Existing access closure (Musley Hill) (3V05)
Page 139 a) 3/12/1955/FP and b) 3/12/1956/LB
10. Wheel washing facilities (3V25)
11. Construction parking and storage (3V22)
12. Cycle Parking facilities (2E29)
13. Withdrawal of P.D (Schedule 2, Part 1 Classes A, B, C and E) (2E23)
14. Landscape design proposals (4P12) b, c, d, e, f, I, j, k and l
15. Landscape Works implementation (4P13)
16. Construction hours of working – plant and machinery (6N07)
17. The carports hereby approved shall remain open structures for the lifetime of the development hereby approved.
Reason: To ensure the continued provision of off street parking facilities in the interests of highway safety in accordance with policy TR7 of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007
18. Prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved, further survey work shall be undertaken to confirm the presence/absence of bats in accordance with the recommendations as set out in the Bat Inspection Report compiled by CSa Environmental Planning dated March 2013. The findings of these surveys shall be used to inform an appropriate bat mitigation strategy; the details of such shall be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved mitigation measures shall then be carried out prior to the commencement of the development hereby permitted.
Reason: To mitigate against the potential presence of bats, a protected species, in accordance with policy ENV16 of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007.
19. Contaminated land survey and remediation (2F33)
Directives:
1. This permission does not convey any consent which may be required under any legislation other than the Town and Country Planning Acts. Any permission required under the Building Regulations or under any other Act, must be obtained from the relevant authority or body e.g. Fire Officer, Health and Safety Executive, Environment Agency (Water Interest) etc. Neither does this permission negate or override any Page 140 a) 3/12/1955/FP and b) 3/12/1956/LB
private covenants which may affect the land. 2. Highway Works (amended to contact Highways at County Hall, Hertford Tel 0300 123 4047).
3. (26LB) Relationship with Listed Building Consent
4. (19SN) Street Naming and Numbering
5. (28GP) Groundwater Protection Zone (Musley Lane)
Summary of Reasons for Decision
East Herts Council has considered the applicant’s proposal in a positive and proactive manner with regard to the policies of the Development Plan (Minerals Local Plan, Waste Core Strategy and Development Management Policies DPD 2012 and the ’saved’ policies of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007); the National Planning Policy Framework and in accordance with the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2012 (as amended). The balance of the considerations having regard to those policies is that permission should be granted. b) The Director of Neighbourhood Services be authorised to GRANT listed building consent in respect of 3/12/1956LB subject to the following conditions:
1. Listed Building Three year time limit (IT14)
2. Samples of Materials (2E12)
3. Listed building - making good (8L10)
4. Repairs Schedule (8L11)
5. Conservation Area (demolition) (8L12)
6. Conservation Area (clearance of site) (8L13)
7. Prior to the commencement of the works to the listed building hereby approved, further precautionary survey work shall be undertaken to confirm the presence/absence of bats in accordance with the recommendations as set out in the Bat Inspection Report compiled by CSa Environmental Planning dated March 2013. The findings of these surveys shall be used to inform an appropriate bat mitigation strategy, the details of such shall be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Page 141 a) 3/12/1955/FP and b) 3/12/1956/LB
Local Planning Authority. The approved mitigation measures shall then be carried out prior to the commencement of the works hereby permitted.
Reason: To discharge the Council’s and applicants legal duties in respect of European Protected Species under the Habitats Directive and mitigate against any potential harm to bats.
Summary of Reasons for Decision
East Herts Council has considered the applicant’s proposal in a positive and proactive manner with regard to the policies of the National Planning Policy Framework and in accordance with the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2012 (as amended). The balance of the considerations having regard to those policies and the pre- application advice given is that listed building consent should be granted.
(195512FPLB.TA)
1.0 Background:
1.1 Members will recall that this application was previously reported to the Development Management Committee of 22 May 2013, where it was deferred. This was to enable Officers to investigate whether the development proposed is the minimum necessary in financial terms to generate sufficient funds to provide for the repair and restoration of the listed school building and to ensure that it would provide for a long term viable use of the listed building. Members also raised concerns during the meeting regarding highway safety and access. The previous report is attached at Essential Reference Paper A.
1.2 Having regard to the concerns raised by Members, the applicant instructed Chartered Surveyors to undertake a ‘Development Appraisal’ in relation to the financial viability of the scheme. The applicant has also now provided a Highways Statement. A small change is proposed to the development comprising of a 1.0m iron railing boundary fence to enclose the school playground adjacent to the parking spaces. Having regard to the new information submitted, neighbouring occupiers, Local Councillors, the Town Council and County Highways have all been re- consulted.
1.3 The applicant has asked that the Development Appraisal be independently assessed by the District Valuation Service (DVS) on behalf of the Council. The DVS has advised in relation to the methodology of the submitted report and with regard to what amount of Page 142 a) 3/12/1955/FP and b) 3/12/1956/LB
development would still enable a viable scheme to be implemented.
2.0 Consultation Responses:
2.1 County Highways have assessed the Highways Statement and do not wish to alter their earlier comments raising no objections to the proposal. Members will recall that County Highways do not wish to restrict the grant of permission, subject to conditions. They request S106 contributions of £8,000 towards kerbing works and £7,500 for a new bus shelter.
2.2 The Councils Conservation Officer has commented verbally that the change introducing the boundary fencing is considered to have no unacceptable impact on the setting of the listed buildings on site.
2.3 The Council’s Landscape Officer does not wish to object to the iron railing boundary fence. Members will recall that the Landscape Officer previously recommended that planning consent is granted subject to landscaping conditions.
3.0 Town Council Representations:
3.1 Ware Town Council have not commented in response to the additional information. Members will recall that the Town Council previously objected to the proposals on the grounds of insufficient parking and overdevelopment of the site.
4.0 Other Representations:
4.1 Members will recall that Councillor J Wing had objected to the planning application and listed building application. In response to the Development Appraisal, Councillor Wing has responded setting out his view that a lower level of development would provide sufficient funds to allow the school building to be restored and is sceptical of the figure given for school building restoration costs and with regard to the basis for the amount paid for the purchase of the site.
4.2 Members may also recall that 24 letters of objection from neighbouring occupiers were received in relation to the original plans. Following clarification from the developer of the use of the school building as a Day Nursery and changes to increase the amount of parking for the building, 12 neighbours have written to maintain their objection to the amended plans.
Page 143 a) 3/12/1955/FP and b) 3/12/1956/LB
4.3 In response to the latest consultation, two further letters have been received. The letters reiterate earlier expressed concerns regarding parking and highway safety and impact on the listed building, the details of which are summarised in the previous report.
5.0 Considerations:
Viability
5.1 Members will be aware that the catalyst for the improvements to the listed school building comes from the developer being able to secure the development of the overall site. The Development Appraisal sets out that the revenue from the residential development will fund the renovation of the school. However, in reaching a decision on the matter it is appropriate for the Council as decision maker to weigh any harm arising from the development against the benefits of renovating the former school and securing an active use of the listed building.
5.2 The District Valuation Service has undertaken an assessment of the Developer Appraisal following their own research into both current sale values and costs. The DVS have found the build costs of the new dwellings projected by the developer to be slightly high. Following their assessment, the scheme as proposed would produce a developer profit of 12.71% rather than a profit of 5% as highlighted by the developer. However, they note that a 12.71% profit still represents a deficit of £126,421 when compared with the acknowledged industry benchmark of 17%. As such, the DVS do not regard the scheme as a financially attractive one and categorically state that any attempt to reduce the amount of development would only have the effect of increasing the deficit, making the scheme even less attractive.
5.3 Officers are aware of the considerable risks inherent in all development projects particularly those of this size and have regard to the vulnerable market conditions in which the developer is operating.
5.4 The concerns raised by Councillor Wing in relation to the purchase cost of the site and the figure to restore the school are noted. However, the DVS have undertaken their own independent research and are satisfied that the agreed purchase price is reasonable taking into account the site’s development potential. They have also accepted the developers assessed cost for the repair works to the school.
5.5 As is often the case with assessments of this nature, whilst there can be a difference of professional opinion in relation to various elements of the costs and fees, it is the overall balance of costs and revenue that Page 144 a) 3/12/1955/FP and b) 3/12/1956/LB
the Council should primarily concern itself with. In this case, there may be a view that the renovation costs are high. However, it is acknowledged that the overall profit to be generated by the development is low when compared to the industry standard. Adjustment in one of these areas of cost will be matched by an adjustment in the other and therefore the overall impact is very likely to be broadly neutral.
5.6 The professional advice the Council has received then sets out that, from the information to hand, even a small reduction in value to be derived from the development could affect the fine margins and make the scheme even less attractive to any developer. Officers note that although the 12.71% profit is more than the 5% anticipated by the developer, it is still short of the industry standard of 17%. A 12.71% profit margin is considered reasonable to accommodate for the uncertainty in the market and to make the development worthwhile for the owner and applicant. Furthermore, Officers note that whilst the DVS have accepted the figures provided by the developer with regard to the sales value of the dwellings, they do state that the figures are slightly optimistic, especially when compared with the last completed sales in 2011 at the similarly modern development adjacent at Sandeman Gardens.
5.7 In light of the above, Officers do not consider that it is reasonable to seek to reduce the quantum of dwellings proposed. This would serve to make the scheme less attractive to any developer seeking to take the site forward and could compromise the much needed restoration and remediation works to the school.
Highways
5.8 In light of Members concerns about highway safety, a Highways Statement has been submitted in support of the development. The Highways Statement reviews existing site conditions and illustrates that the site is accessible to key services, local amenities and by a range of transport modes.
5.9 The Highways Statement acknowledges that public objections have been received in relation to the development, most notably the concerns regarding the lack of parking for the school and the possibility that residents of the new dwellings will park their cars on Sandeman Gardens in preference to the application site.
5.10 In terms of car parking, the Highways Statement considers the provision of 9 spaces for the Day Nursery to be reasonable and adequate, having Page 145 a) 3/12/1955/FP and b) 3/12/1956/LB
regard to the size constraints of the Victorian school building and the extensive network of neighbourhood pedestrian links within the immediate area. It may reasonably be assumed, it states, that some of the parents/carers will walk to the site to drop off and collect their children.
5.11 In addition to the parking provision, there are also two bus stops (one NW bound and one SE bound) located within immediate vicinity of the application site on Homefield Road. A regular service is provided (30 min interval in the day) linking the site with Ware town centre and Hertford. To assist vehicles entering and exiting the site safely, on street parking is restricted immediately adjacent to the Victorian school building on Homefield Road and access to the development would not interfere with regular bus movements on Homefield Road. It should be noted that the new access point would benefit from the appropriate visibility splays, which can be secured by planning condition. It is acknowledged that the LPA cannot control where future residents park their cars. It is reasonable to assume however that most people would prefer to park their cars in safe and secure designated spaces away from the street. Parking off the site would tend to be less reliable in terms of its availability.
5.12 County Highways support the proposal and the findings in the Highways Statement and overall, Officers are content that there is sufficient parking proposed to support the development and that the development would not put significant additional pressure on the highway network. Parking provision accords with relevant planning policies.
Design Changes
5.13 As noted above, the only change in the design would be to erect a 1.0m iron railing boundary fence to enclose the school playground adjacent to the parking spaces. This is a sensible proposal that would separate the amenity area of the school from the parking area. In terms of impact on the character of the area, the fencing would be contained within the site with limited impact on the wider character of the area. In terms of its impact on the listed building, provided suitable fencing is agreed by condition, it is considered that this would not harm the character or setting of the listed building. Accordingly, Officers raise no objection to this small change.
6.0 Conclusion:
6.1 Having regard to the above considerations and those set out in the previous report, it is necessary to weigh up the benefit which arises Page 146 a) 3/12/1955/FP and b) 3/12/1956/LB
from the development against the harm that is caused. It is acknowledged that the proposals introduce further development into the vicinity of the listed school buildings and therefore have visual and other impacts. Against this, the benefit of bringing the former school buildings back into beneficial use must be assigned considerable weight. Officers remain of the view that harm, so far as it occurs, is outweighed by the benefit here. It is concluded then that a further reduction to the amount of development would have the impact that the proposals, with the associated benefits, would be unlikely to be implemented. It is recommended that planning permission and listed building consent are granted subject to the conditions outlined at the head of this report.
Page 147 This page is intentionally left blank
Page 148 Essential Reference Paper A a) 3/12/1955/FP and b) 3/12/1956/LB – Demolition of the existing outbuildings and renovation of the former Victorian School. Development of the former school playground and outdoor space for 5no 4 bed dwellings and 2no 2 bed flats at Musley Infant School, Musley Hill, Ware SG12 7NB for Musley Hill Development Ltd
Date of Receipt: a) 09.11.2012 Type: a) Full - Minor b) 09.11.2012 b) Listed Building - Other
Parish: WARE
Ward: WARE – TRINITY
RECOMMENDATION: a) The Director of Neighbourhood Services be authorised to GRANT planning permission under planning ref: 3/12/1955/FP subject to the following conditions:
1. Three year time limit (IT12)
2. Approved plans (2E10) – 1299 PL01; PL02; PL03 F; PL04 A; PL05 A; PL07 A; PL08 A; PL09 B; PL10 B
3. Prior to the occupation of any of the residential units hereby approved, the listed school building shall be fully repaired and refurbished in accordance with a scheme to be first submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
Reason: To ensure the satisfactory development of the whole site and to ensure the historic and architectural character of the building is adequately restored in accordance with Policy ENV1 of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007.
4. Hard Surfacing (Roads, Driveways) (3V21)
5. Boundary Walls and Fences (2E07)
6. Approved accesses only (3V04)
7. Pedestrian visibility splays (2.0m x 2.0m) (3V10)
8. Provision and retention of parking spaces (3V23)
9. Existing access closure (Musley Hill) (3V05) Page 149 a) 3/12/1955/FP and b) 3/12/1956/LB
10. Wheel washing facilities (3V25) 11. Construction parking and storage (3V22)
12. Cycle Parking facilities (2E29)
13. Withdrawal of P.D (Schedule 2, Part 1 Classes A, B, C and E) (2E23)
14. Landscape design proposals (4P12) b, c, d, e, f, I, j, k and l
15. Landscape Works implementation (4P13)
16. Construction hours of working – plant and machinery (6N07)
17. The carports hereby approved shall remain open structures for the lifetime of the development hereby approved.
Reason: To ensure the continued provision of off street parking facilities in the interests of highway safety in accordance with Policy TR7 of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007.
18. Prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved, further survey work shall be undertaken to confirm the presence/absence of bats in accordance with the recommendations as set out in the Bat Inspection Report compiled by CSa Environmental Planning dated March 2013. The findings of these surveys shall be used to inform an appropriate bat mitigation strategy, the details of such shall be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved mitigation measures shall then be carried out prior to the commencement of the development hereby permitted.
Reason: To mitigate against the potential presence of bats, a protected species, in accordance with policy ENV16 of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007.
19. Contaminated land survey and remediation (2F33)
Directives:
1. This permission does not convey any consent which may be required under any legislation other than the Town and Country Planning Acts. Any permission required under the Building Regulations or under any other Act, must be obtained from the relevant authority or body e.g. Fire Officer, Health and Safety Executive, Environment Agency (Water Interest) etc. Neither does this permission negate or override any Page 150 a) 3/12/1955/FP and b) 3/12/1956/LB
private covenants which may affect the land.
2. Highway Works (amended to contact Highways at County Hall, Hertford Tel 0300 123 4047).
3. (26LB) Relationship with Listed Building Consent
4. (19SN) Street Naming and Numbering
5. (28GP) Groundwater Protection Zone (Musley Lane)
Summary of Reasons for Decision
East Herts Council has considered the applicant’s proposal in a positive and proactive manner with regard to the policies of the Development Plan (Hertfordshire County Structure Plan, Minerals Local Plan, Waste Core Strategy and Development Management Policies DPD 2012 and the ’saved’ policies of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007 and in particular Policies SD2, BH1, BH2, BH3, TR2, TR7, HSG7, ENV1, ENV2, ENV3, ENV16, LRC1; the National Planning Policy Framework and in accordance with the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) (Amendment No. 2) Order 2012. The balance of the considerations having regard to those policies and the pre-application advice given is that permission should be granted. b) The Director of Neighbourhood Services be authorised to GRANT listed building consent in respect of 3/12/1956LB subject to the following conditions:
1. Listed Building Three year time limit (IT14)
2. Samples of Materials (2E12)
3. Listed building - making good (8L10)
4. Repairs Schedule (8L11)
5. Conservation Area (demolition) (8L12).
6. Conservation Area (clearance of site) (8L13)
7. Prior to the commencement of the works to the listed building hereby approved, further precautionary survey work shall be undertaken to confirm the presence/absence of bats in accordance with the recommendations as set out in the Bat Inspection Report compiled by Page 151 a) 3/12/1955/FP and b) 3/12/1956/LB
CSa Environmental Planning dated March 2013. The findings of these surveys shall be used to inform an appropriate bat mitigation strategy, the details of such shall be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved mitigation measures shall then be carried out prior to the commencement of the works hereby permitted.
Reason: To discharge the Council’s and applicants legal duties in respect of European Protected Species under the Habitats Directive and mitigate against any potential harm to bats.
Summary of Reasons for Decision
East Herts Council has considered the applicant’s proposal in a positive and proactive manner with regard to the policies of the National Planning Policy Framework and in accordance with the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) (Amendment No. 2) Order 2012. The balance of the considerations having regard to those policies and the pre-application advice given is that listed building consent should be granted.
(195512FPLB.TA)
1.0 Background:
1.1 The application site is shown on the attached OS extract and is located on the corner of Musley Hill and Homefield Road in Ware. It comprises a Grade II listed single storey red brick Victorian School House, various outbuildings and a nineteenth century Fives Court. The Fives Court is specifically referenced in the listing. The school building is a valued local landmark of significant heritage interest. It is subject to long views as approached along nearby public roads.
1.2 The site is bounded to the south and east by close boarded fencing and to north and west by hedging and iron railings which are also referenced in the listing. Vehicular access is provided off Musley Hill and pedestrian access from Homefield Road. There is some sporadic planting contained within the site and a boundary hedge around the north east corner. Large areas of the site are hardsurfaced, including the school playing areas.
1.3 The site is located in a northern, primarily residential, suburb of Ware and is outside of the Ware Conservation Area. Housing in the surrounding streets is predominantly two storey in scale although there are elements of 3 storey and single storey buildings on Musley Hill. Page 152 a) 3/12/1955/FP and b) 3/12/1956/LB
Homefield Road is fairly consistently two-storey with a mix of semi- detached and short terrace dwellings. Sandeman Gardens is a relatively new development of 20 detached, semi-detached and terraced dwellings located to the south east of the development site.
1.4 The proposed development comprises of several elements. It is proposed to fully restore the listed school building with the intention of returning it to its former school use. Members may be aware that the site has been unoccupied for in excess of 8 years and that the condition of the listed school building has been a significant local and conservation concern. Members resolved in their meeting of 7th November 2012 to grant a Section 54 Urgent Works Notice to secure works considered urgently necessary for the preservation of the listed school building and these works have since been undertaken. Part of the restoration works will include the protection and retention of the Fives Court and the restoration of the listed railings. It is proposed to demolish a group of latterly constructed and unsightly outbuildings. The school would be served by 6no car parking spaces.
1.5 As part of the works, 5no four bed dwellings are proposed to be erected on the site and 2no two bed flats. The dwellings would be arranged along the east perimeter of the site. Units 1-3 will front onto Homefield Road whilst no’s 4-7 would front onto Sandeman Gardens. The new dwellings would be served by 13no car parking spaces, 6 of which would be contained within carports.
1.6 Both the school and the new dwellings would be served by a new vehicular access crossing off Homefield Road. The existing crossing, from Musley Hill, would be removed and the footway reinstated.
1.7 The proposal presented to Members has been amended since first submitted. The amended scheme has removed 2no dwellings from the proposal and retained the school playground area. Where access was previously proposed off Musley Hill, it is now proposed off Homefield Road. Following receipt of amended plans, relevant consultees and third parties were re-notified. It is the amended plans that Members are asked to consider.
2.0 Site History:
2.1 The site has previously been subject to the approval of planning permission for the extension of the school building and change of use to a community facility and the erection of 2no detached dwellings. This permission was last renewed on 1 st March 2010 and has now expired. The specific details are as follows: Page 153 a) 3/12/1955/FP and b) 3/12/1956/LB
• 3/06/1580/FP – Demolition of outbuildings, erection of two 3 bedroom residential dwellings and erection of extension to existing building for community use - Approved with Conditions 25 th October 2006.
• 3/06/1581/LB - Demolition of outbuildings, erection of two 3 bedroom residential dwellings and erection of extension to existing building for community use - Approved with Conditions 11 th August 2006
• 3/09/1613/FN – Demolition of outbuildings, erection of two 3 bedroom residential dwellings and erection of extensi9on to existing building for community use - Approved with Conditions 10 th December 2009.
• 3/09/1614/LB – Demolition of outbuilding, temporary building and timber shed. Alteration of Victorian building to accommodate community use, alteration to north east elevation to accommodate extension for community use - Approved with Conditions 1st March 2010
2.2 There are no longer any extant permissions on the site and none of the above applications have been implemented, hence why the school building continued to fall into disrepair. Prior to the above applications, Hertfordshire County Council granted Deemed Permissions for mobile classrooms at the site in 1987, 1991 and 1997.
3.0 Consultation Responses:
3.1 County Highways do not wish to restrict the grant of permission subject to conditions to secure a visibility splay onto Homefield Road, wheel washing facilities, parking areas and the closure of the Musley Hill entrance. County Highways are also seeking Section 106 contributions of £8,000 towards kerbing works and £7,500 for a new bus shelter. The amended proposal is an improved scheme as it removes vehicular parking from a classified road – Musley Hill.
3.2 The County Historic Environment Unit advise that the development is unlikely to have an impact upon significant heritage assets.
3.3 The Conservation Officer had raised concerns with the original proposal of 9no dwellings but is satisfied the amended scheme has overcome these concerns. An active use of the listed building is imperative to ensure the maintenance and longevity of the heritage asset. The Page 154 a) 3/12/1955/FP and b) 3/12/1956/LB
reduction to 7no dwellings has alleviated the overall impact on the setting of the listed building. Re-locating the access has maintained views of the building from the north and helps to retain the relationship of the school with Fives Court, preserving the overall setting of the listed building. The layout of the dwellings is in keeping with the urban grain whilst their design reflects the Victorian architectural detail of the listed building. The success of the scheme also depends on the use of high quality materials and appropriate landscaping. Recommends Approval.
3.4 Environmental Health at East Herts District Council has advised that any permission granted should include conditions relating to hours of working and soil decontamination.
3.5 The Council’s Landscape Officer recommends that consent is granted subject to landscaping conditions. The revised layout plan provides a suitable landscape setting for the listed building and new dwellings. Sufficient space is retained for appropriate tree planting.
3.6 Affinity Water wishes to notify the applicant that the site is located within the groundwater Source Protection Zone (SPZ) of Musley Lane Pumping Station.
3.7 The Victorian Society objects to the scheme as it will harm the setting of the listed building and because it fails to provide a sensitive, long term and viable use for the dilapidating historic structure.
3.8 English Heritage welcome the works to the listed building in principle although are concerned that no definite use has been identified. The works would diminish the significance of the listed building. The council should weigh the harm to the setting and significance of the school against the benefits that the proposals might generate.
3.9 Hertfordshire Biological Records Centre refers to the submitted Bat Survey Report dated March 2013 which advises that, whilst no bats were found, access to a number of the buildings was restricted and there are a number of external features within the school building that provide roosting opportunities. As a result, further emergence surveys should be carried out before a planning decision can be taken.
3.10 Sport England has no comments to make.
4.0 Town Council Representations:
4.1 Ware Town Council objects to the proposals on the grounds of Page 155 a) 3/12/1955/FP and b) 3/12/1956/LB
insufficient parking and overdevelopment of the site. Existing traffic levels frequently create problems and Sandeman Gardens is already congested.
5.0 Other Representations:
5.1 Councillor J. Wing has objected to the planning application and listed building application and his objections to the revised application can be summarised as follows:
• The development should not be allowed to result in additional car parking on adjacent roads. Sandeman Gardens is already congested; • The provision of 6 spaces for the former school building is wholly inadequate; • The number of homes remains more than envisaged; and • Pedestrian access to the site off Sandeman Gardens will result in new residents using Sandeman Gardens to park cars
5.2 The application has been advertised by way of press notice, site notice and neighbour notification. It was re-notified following receipt of amended plans.
5.3 24 letters of objection from neighbouring occupiers were received in relation to the original plans. Of these, 12 neighbours have maintained their objection to the amended plans. Many of the neighbours have objected to both the planning application and the listed building application.
5.4 Many of the letters in response to the original scheme welcomed the re- use of the school building and supported the infill development in principle. However, there were strong concerns raised in relation to the number and size of dwellings proposed. Many felt that 9 dwellings was too high a density of development. Plot 1 was considered to be too close to the listed school building. With regard to the re-use of the scheme some letters were concerns that the proposed use was too vague, others felt that a lack of storage and parking would not help its ability to find a user. A nursery is felt to be a popular option for many neighbours.
5.5 The other objections were mostly concerned with parking congestion that is currently a problem and was felt likely to worsen with the proposed scheme. It was considered there should be 2 spaces per dwelling. The original access point off Musley Hill was criticised as Page 156 a) 3/12/1955/FP and b) 3/12/1956/LB
difficult and dangerous with accidents already at the busy Musley Hill and Homefield Road junction. In terms of neighbour amenity, some concerns were raised in relation to overlooking and loss of view. One neighbour has objected that the proposed carports will impact upon amenity and outlook.
5.6 The 12 letters received in relation to the amended proposal raise similar objections. The letters generally acknowledge an improvement to the proposed scheme and some have welcomed the developer seeking to clarify the intended use of the premises as a Kindergarten/Day Nursery as well as the additional car parking. However, the content of the objections raised can be summarised as follows:
• Alternative community uses of the building may bring noise and anti social behaviour; • Congestion and a risk of accidents will continue to occur; • Insufficient parking for the school/community use; • Site not large enough for the current proposal; • The development will exacerbate existing parking problems on surrounding roads; • The amount of development is not safe; • The school would still be left with a small outdoor play area.
6.0 Policy:
6.1 The relevant ‘saved’ Local Plan policies in this application include the following:
SD3 Making Development More Sustainable HSG7 Replacement Dwellings and Infill Development TR2 Access to New Developments TR7 Car Parking – Standards ENV1 Design and Environmental Quality ENV2 Landscaping ENV9 Withdrawal of Domestic Permitted Development Rights ENV16 Protected Species BH6 New Development in Conservation Areas LRC10 Tourism
6.2 In addition, the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) is of relevance in the determination of the application.
7.0 Considerations:
Page 157 a) 3/12/1955/FP and b) 3/12/1956/LB
7.1 The main considerations in the determination of the planning application (3/12/1955/FP) relate to: • The principle of the development; • The acceptability and quality of the design of the scheme; • The related issue of balancing any harm to the setting of the listed building with the benefits of securing an active use; • Whether the density and extent of development results in an unacceptable impact on neighbouring amenity; • Whether the scheme is acceptable in a highway context and in terms of parking; • The impact on protected species and whether any impacts can be suitably mitigated;
7.2 The main consideration in the determination of the listed building application (3/12/1956/LB) relates to:
• Whether the associated demolition works of some of the buildings surrounding the school harm the heritage asset (main school building) and whether the scheme is otherwise acceptable in conservation terms.
The Principle of the Development
7.3 The site is located within a residential area with mostly Victorian, relatively high density, housing to the south and more spacious later 20 th century housing to the north. Within the East Herts Local Plan the site is located within the town of Ware wherein there is no objection in principle to development subject to the development complying with other policies in the Local Plan.
7.4 The question of principle lies in the site’s designation as an Open Space. Policy LRC1 of the Local Plan states that proposals which result in the loss of open space, including school playing fields, will be refused unless (a) alternative facilities can be provided or (b) if it can be demonstrated that the facility is no longer needed and there is no longer viable demand for an alternative facility.
7.5 The site’s planning history reveals that planning permission has been previously granted in 2006 for an extension to the school building to provide a community use and 2no detached dwellings. At the time, the question of open space was considered and the loss of playground accepted under point (b) of the policy. This was on the basis that the playground was not needed given the closure of the site. The site has since remained unoccupied and the playground is not in use or indeed Page 158 a) 3/12/1955/FP and b) 3/12/1956/LB
accessible to members of the public. The site therefore serves no active purpose as open space and its loss can reasonably be justified under part (b) of Policy LRC1. It is noted that Sport England has not objected to the loss.
7.6 In this instance however, the amended plans have sought to retain the school’s playground and the intention is for the school building to be occupied as a Kindergarten/Day Nursery. Whilst it is appreciated that there have been concerns raised from nearby residents about the possible use of the building, the applicant has confirmed that negotiations with a nursery school provider are at an advanced stage. Clearly, any occupation of the building outside of a D1 Use Class would require consent in the form of a separate change of use application from the Local Planning Authority.
7.7 Bringing the building back into active use and restoring it is, of course, a significant benefit of the scheme and one to which substantial weight should be given. The building is now in poor repair, considered vulnerable and at risk and has been subject of an Urgent Works notice to secure it as weathertight. Whilst there would be some loss of open space from the overall development, this should be balanced against the site’s currently vacant use; the fact that an area of playing space would be retained, and the benefits derived from the restoration works.
7.8 Overall, the principle of development is considered acceptable. However, the benefits deriving from the scheme need to be balanced against any harm caused in any other respects.
Design and Conservation
7.9 Policy ENV1 requires all development proposals to be of a high standard of design and layout and to reflect local distinctiveness. The NPPF, at Section 7 attaches great importance to good design as a key aspect of sustainable development.
7.10 The application is submitted with a Design and Access Statement. The layout of the development is based around the retention of the school, the Fives Court and a free standing brick out house. The dwellings are designed to be subordinate to the school and their ridge heights would not exceed that of the main school building. The steeply sloping tiled roofs and large fenestration reflect the Victorian architectural detail of the listed school. The built form is all two-storey with accommodation within the roof on plots 1, 4, 5, 6 and 7.
7.11 The dwellings are all located to the east of the site to address either Page 159 a) 3/12/1955/FP and b) 3/12/1956/LB
Sandeman Gardens or Homefield Road. Gardens back into the centre of the site towards the school and are of reasonable size. The two flats are in a corner location and Officers consider this works well. Overall, the dwellings have elevation interest and create a coherent sense of place.
7.12 In terms of density, whilst there has been some concern raised over a possible overdevelopment of the site, the design is considered to reasonably reflect both the pattern and density of development in the local area. Whilst the dwellings are afforded narrow gaps between one another and are gathered to one side of the site, this has the clear benefit of reducing the imposition on the immediate setting of the school, something that has been considerably improved as a result of the loss of 2 dwellings from the proposal. The removal of these dwellings (formerly Plots 1 and 2) and their flat roof elements has removed significant bulk from the development and allowed for views of the listed school from the north. The nearest dwelling is now some 16m from the east facing gable of the school. By comparison with the cancelled scheme and the 2006 and 2009 approved scheme, the design is now considerably more sensitive to the setting of the listed building. To reduce any impact going forward, I have recommended that permitted development rights be removed from the new dwellings, to ensure an element of control is retained by the Local Authority over new development in this sensitive setting.
7.13 The relocation of the access crossing to Homefield Road has also considerably improved the layout of the development and retained a more spacious setting for the school. The new access road helps to create a logical subdivision of the school with the new dwellings and retains the school’s amenity space and playground area. The historic relationship of the school with the Fives Court is retained.
7.14 The scheme is now supported by the Council’s Conservation Officer, who regards the development of the whole site as a catalyst for the required improvement to the listed building. However, the success of the scheme is considered to be dependent on the use of high quality materials and improved landscaping, both of which can be secured by appropriate conditions. It is noted that the scheme would result in the loss of some trees to the south east side of the site, but this has to be balanced against the significant additional planting that is being proposed, together with the retention of the hedgerow around the school building. It is also noted that the developer intends to convert the school playground area to a soft landscaped area.
7.15 Overall therefore, the proposed scheme is considered to secure a high standard of development that will sustain and enhance the setting the Page 160 a) 3/12/1955/FP and b) 3/12/1956/LB
heritage assets. The developer is prepared to agree to a condition that the repair and restoration works to the school be completed prior to the occupation of any of the dwellings. This would ensure the overall site is developed without incurring significant delays in the improvement works to the school. This is considered both a key benefit and a reasonable condition on any consent granted. Furthermore, in view of the sensitive location of the proposed new dwellings, adjacent to the listed school, and the restricted size of the plots, Officers consider it necessary and reasonable to imposed a condition withdrawing permitted development rights for future extensions; roof alterations and garden buildings so that the LPA can ensure that any future development respects the setting, character and appearance of the heritage asset.
Demolition works and listed building consent
7.16 The buildings the subject of demolition have already been approved for such previously as part of the 2006 and 2009 approvals. It is debatable whether the more modern flat roofed modular building requires consent, but in any case it is an unattractive post 1948 building that offers nothing of value to the listed building. Similarly, the demolition of two buildings that are physical extensions of the school have previously been approved for demolition and are not considered to add to the heritage value of the school building. One benefit of the amended proposal is the retention of a yellow brick outbuilding to the southern boundary of the site adjacent to the Fives Court.
7.17 The plans have included a schedule of renovation works and temporary works that are required. The Conservation Officer is satisfied with this programme of repair but would like the method of repair to be agreed by condition through the submission of a more detailed repairs schedule. There are no new windows, doors or other building works proposed and as such, no conditions are recommended in this regard. However, should this be the case, it would most likely require a separate listed building consent.
7.18 Overall, the works to the listed building are a positive development that would enhance and improve this heritage asset.
Neighbour Amenity
7.19 Policy ENV1 of the Local Plan requires development proposals to respect the amenity of occupiers of neighbouring buildings.
7.20 Some residents have objected that the scheme will result in overlooking from the new development or that the scheme is overbearing and Page 161 a) 3/12/1955/FP and b) 3/12/1956/LB
overshadowing. Most of the objections related to the original proposal. In terms of overlooking, the dwellings do not directly face into neighbouring gardens in a manner that is different from existing dwellings within the surrounding area. The distances between the dwellings and neighbouring houses mean that the arrangement is acceptable in my view and is not a matter which could be refused and sustained in a planning appeal.
7.21 The car port placed on the south side of the site would have some impact on the neighbour at No.19 Sandeman Gardens and the views out from this property and is something that the neighbour has objected to. However, the carport would be a relatively open structure and located adjacent to a double garage at No.19. It is not the case, in Officers view, that this structure would cause significant enclosure or overshadowing so as to warrant refusal.
7.22 Officers note that some of the neighbour letters have registered concern about the use of the school building and the possible impact that could arise should an unsuitable community use be introduced. The applicant’s have sought to address this by confirming that it is their intention to introduce day nursery at the building, which many of the letters tend to favour. However, it should be noted that the building has a current D1 use class and could be changed to another use within this use class without the need for planning permission. It is unlikely, in my view, that the small school building could contain a use so as to be so intensive to interfere with the amenities of neighbouring occupiers. However, as this is something outside of the control of the Local Authority, it is not something that can be held up as a reason to refuse the application.
Access and Car Parking
7.23 Concerns were raised about the use of the existing entrance to the site off Musley Hill both by nearby residents and County Highways. Whilst Highways did not wish to object to this access, they acknowledged that a Traffic Regulation Order to ensure that visibility splays are unobstructed by parked vehicles would be necessary to secure a safe means of access. Visibility splays are also required with the amended access, off Homefield Road, but this entry point avoids use of a classified road and can be introduced without interference with the nearby bus stop. As was referred to earlier in this report, the access off Homefield Road also results in benefits on Conservation grounds, in that the new access road creates a logical subdivision of the school building and the dwellings whilst ensuring that the school building is no longer separated from the listed Fives Court.
Page 162 a) 3/12/1955/FP and b) 3/12/1956/LB
7.24 The main pedestrian access to the dwellings is provided from Homefield Road through the back of each of the dwellings. Access to the dwelling frontages is also available from either Homefield Road or Sandeman Gardens depending on the dwelling number. Access to the school is as existing although it will be improved by the introduction of a ramped path for wheelchair users.
7.25 The majority of the objections to the proposed scheme relate to car parking, anticipated congestion and traffic problems that may arise from the introduction of new development. The amended scheme has increased the amount of car parking for the dwellings and for the school building. 13 car parking spaces are proposed in total for the dwellings which equates to 1.86 spaces per dwelling. In effect, 6 of the units are provided with 2 spaces and 1 (dwelling no.1) with a single space.
7.26 The site is located within a 10 minute walk of Ware Town Centre (approximately 670m) and is designated as a Zone 4 area in the Council’s adopted Vehicle Parking Standards October 2008. Under these standards the maximum parking provision for the proposed development of 5 x 4 bed houses and 2 x 2 bed flats would be 17 spaces.
7.27 Given the sustainable location of the site close to local services and the provision of nearby public transport options, the provision of 13 spaces to serve 7 dwellings, 2 of which are 2 bedroom flats is considered an acceptable level of provision that can reasonably accommodate parking demand without causing a build up of parking on nearby roads.
7.28 However, there is a strong level of concern amongst nearby residents about the parking provision of 6no spaces for the school building. This has been increased from 3 spaces during the course of the application. A Kindergarten Day Nursery (Class D1) seeks 1 space per 4 school children but as yet no indication of children numbers is available for the new use. However, it is reasonable to assume that the small scale of the school building would restrict the ability of the building to operate on a large scale in terms of numbers. It should also be acknowledged that the Nursery would be intended for the local community, many of which would be expected to walk to the site to drop off children. The only people using the facility that would be likely to need permanent parking provision would be members of staff, for which 6 spaces is considered an adequate level of provision.
7.29 There is the possibility that the building could be used for other Class D1 uses. However, any such use would be likely to draw custom from the local area, within easy walking distance and good public transport links. The intensity of any such use would also still be restricted by the size of Page 163 a) 3/12/1955/FP and b) 3/12/1956/LB
the building.
7.30 There is the option of increasing parking provision within the site for the community use, subject to planning permission, should any future use of the building require additional parking. However, this is not encouraged at this stage, given that the facility is intended to serve the immediate and local community and additional parking provision would result in reduced soft landscaping within the site. However, it could be accommodated if required, especially if this would increase the ability of the building to attract an occupant for the long term that will maintain the building in active use.
7.31 There is scope at this Zone 4 location, to impose a degree of flexibility in the application of maximum parking standards and it is considered that this should be the case at this location given the urgent need to secure the improvement works to the building and the ability to accommodate additional parking at the school in the future, should this be required.
7.32 It should also be noted that County Highways have not objected to the application but have recommended a series of conditions that have all been included as part of the recommendation.
Protected Species
7.33 Policy ENV16 of the Local Plan states that development that may have an adverse impact on a protected species will only be permitted where any harm can be avoided.
7.34 Herts Biological Records Centre (HBRC) had originally commented that the site may contain bats and that a survey was required to demonstrate their presence and mitigation measures.
7.35 A Bat Inspection Report has since been submitted which found no evidence of bats within the building. However, the Inspection Report did acknowledge some constraints, which included the inability to inspect parts of some of the buildings on site and furthermore, the internal inspection of the school building contained large amounts of bird debris (carcasses and droppings) which can heavily mask the presence of bats.
7.36 As a result of these constraints, HBRC have asked that further survey work is undertaken in accordance with the recommendations in the Inspection Report and they have suggested that these surveys should be undertaken prior to a decision being made on the application.
7.37 Bats are a protected species and, in the event of a bat roost being Page 164 a) 3/12/1955/FP and b) 3/12/1956/LB
found, or where a proposed development has the potential to cause harm to bats or their habitats, the LPA has a statutory duty to apply three tests prior to making a decision on a planning application. These tests are set out below.
7.38 Although no bats have been found on the site, the report does acknowledge that the school building has the potential to support bats and, as a precautionary approach, Officers have therefore assumed that there is potential for harm to be caused to their habitat and have applied the three derogation tests at this stage in any event. These are:
• The proposals must be for imperative reasons of overriding public interest; • There must be no satisfactory alternative which would have less impact on the bats at the site; and • The favourable conservation status of the species can be maintained through mitigation measures.
7.39 In response to those three tests, officers can comment as follows:
• The repair and retention is essential for heritage and planning reasons. The school is a valued local building, a landmark and a grade II listed building. There is overriding public interest in its repair. • There is no alternative to salvaging the building. This consent only requires modest alteration by demolition of single storey buildings previously approved without objection and these have not been highlighted as likely for a bat roost. • A condition can be imposed on any permission granted to secure additional surveys which in themselves can provide the necessary measures to mitigate any impacts on bats.
7.40 In light of the above assessment, I am satisfied that the works can proceed in accordance with Policy ENV16 of the Local Plan and that harm to the protected species can be avoided or mitigated in accordance with the requirements of European and national wildlife legislation.
Section 106
7.41 The Highway authority has requested that contributions of £8,000 towards kerbing works and £7,500 for a new bus shelter be provided in this case. However, the size of the proposed development falls below the threshold at which the Council can seek contributions in accordance Page 165 a) 3/12/1955/FP and b) 3/12/1956/LB
with its Planning Obligations SPD 2008. Such contributions are only required where a proposal would provide for 10 or more dwellings. The proposal in this case is not considered to be of a scale that justifies, in itself, works to improve kerbing or bus shelters in the area. Officers cannot therefore recommend that those contributions are sought.
8.0 Conclusion:
8.1 The proposed development of the Musley Infant School site has been demonstrated to broadly comply with the relevant policies in the East Herts Local Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.
8.2 There is an urgent need for the school building to be restored and the proposed works include the full renovation of the existing grade II listed school building, something that should, in Officers view, be given substantial weight in the assessment of the application.
8.3 The introduction of 5no dwellings and 2no flats on the site is considered to preserve the setting of the listed building and allows for the improvement works to be undertaken. The size, design and layout of the buildings and access is considered to sustain and enhance the setting of the listed building and secures a good standard of design that is in keeping with the character of the area. Appropriate landscaping and high quality materials will further enhance the site, which has lain vacant for in excess of 8 years.
8.4 The level of parking provision is within the Council’s maximum standard, and the site is in a sustainable location with good access to local services and public transport. When weighed against the benefits of the scheme, this is considered to be acceptable.
8.5 The development can be provided without harm to neighbouring amenity or to protected species.
8.6 Having taken all matters into consideration and, subject to the conditions at the head of this report, Officers recommend that planning permission and Listed Building consent be granted.
Page 166
1 3
1
3 1
0 1 7 2
2 1 6 1 2
QQQ 1 QQQUUU
2 UUUAAA
0 AAAKKKEEE EEERRR RRR R RR RRROOOAAA AAADDD 50 DDD
4
6 1
1
6
3
2
7 2
9
0 2 1 6
3 0 2 3 3 8
1 4
1
1 3 0 0
1
1
2 1
0
8
9a 1 1 5
9 9 7
3 1
3 6 2 4 2
18
1
0 0 18a
9
5 8 2
HHH OOOMM MMEEEFFF FFFIIEIEELLL LLLDDD
R RROOO OOOAAA 9 AAADDD 0 SITE
16
5 1 14
6
7
6
6 6
1 1
16
5
4
8
4
8 2
2
EEE 7 SSSEEE 7
LLLOOOSSSEEE 1
CCCLLLOOO 0 SSS 9 NNN EEE 1 NNN EEE EEE MMM EEE IMIMIM DDD III DDD LLL RRR LLL RRR 8 AAA 1 AAA 5 GGG 5 G GG LLL
LLL NNN
LLL NNN
1 LLL ILILIL 7 AAA 9 III 1 AAA
3 HHH 6 MMM
H H H MMM HHH 2 MMM
EEE YYY 5 YYY 1 DDD EEE DDD EEE NNN LLL NNN LLL AAA SSS AAA SSS a SSS SSS UUU 7
UUU 3
6
MMM 6
MMM 5 4
7 2 3 5
4
6
3
5
2 9
14
1
3
4 9 1
1 0 2 7
2 7
5 1 3 2
DDD This copy has been produced specifically for Map Control Scheme purposes only. No further copies may be made Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown Copyright and may lead to prosecution or civil proceedings Reproduced from the Ordnance Survey map data with the permission of the controller of Her Majesty's Stationery Office Crown Copyright 2009 East Herts Council. LA Ref: 100018528 (
East Herts Council Address: Musley Infants School, Musley Hill, Ware, Hertfordshire, SG12 7NB Wallfields Reference: 3/12/1955/FP & 3/12/1956/LB Pegs Lane Scale: 1:1250 Hertford SG13 8EQ O.S Sheet: TL3614NW Tel: 01279 655261 Date of Print: 1 May 2013 Page 167 This page is intentionally left blank
Page 168 Agenda Item 5i 5i 3/12/2063/FP – Demolition of existing 3 garage blocks and erection of 4 two-storey semi-detached houses with three bedrooms, private amenity space and car parking at Garage Site to the North of 9 Three Stiles, Benington, Stevenage, SG2 7LD for South Anglia Housing
Date of Receipt: 11.12.2012 Type: Full – Minor
Parish: BENINGTON
Ward: WALKERN
RECOMMENDATION:
That planning permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:
1. Three Year Time Limit (1T12)
2. Approved plans (2E10) (Site Location Plan, 101 E, 200 A, 300 A, 301 A, 310 A)
3. Materials of construction (2E11 )
4. Boundary walls and fences (2E07)
5. Refuse disposal facilities (2E24)
6. Lighting details (2E27)
7. Tree/hedge retention and protection (4P05)
8. Landscape design proposals (4P12 ) (a,e,i,j,k,l)
9. Landscape works implementation (4P13 )
10. Construction hours of working - plant and machinery (6N07)
11. Sustainable Drainage (2E43)
12. Contaminated land survey and remediation (2E33)
13. Provision and retention of parking spaces (3V23)
14. Completion of roads/footpaths (3V13)
15. Pedestrian access for members of the public onto the footpath to the north east corner of the site shall be maintained for the lifetime of the development unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Page 169 3/12/2063/FP
Authority.
Reason: To ensure that adequate pedestrian access is provided to serve the development and wider village in accordance with Policy TR2 of the Local Plan.
Directives:
1. Highway Works (06FC2)
2. Street Naming and Numbering (19SN)
3. Asbestos (3AS)
4. Bats (32BA
5. The applicant is advised that the storage of materials should take place within the site and not extend into the public highway without authorisation from the Highway Authority.
Summary of Reasons for Decision
East Herts Council has considered the applicant’s proposal in a positive and proactive manner with regard to the policies of the Development Plan (Minerals Local Plan, Waste Core Strategy and Development Management Policies DPD 2012 and the ’saved’ policies of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007); the National Planning Policy Framework and in accordance with the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) (Amendment No. 2) Order 2012. The balance of the considerations having regard to those policies is that permission should be granted.
(206312FP.TA)
1.0 Background:
1.1 The application site is shown on the attached OS extract. It lies within the village of Benington and is currently occupied by three garage blocks, comprising a total of 25 garages.
1.2 Benington is designated as a Category 2 village in the Local Plan and lies within the Rural Area Beyond the Green Belt. The site is bounded to the north west by the Benington Conservation Area.
1.3 The proposal is for the demolition of the three garage blocks and the erection of 4no. three bedroom affordable dwellings. The dwellings Page 170 3/12/2063/FP
would be located on a parcel of land to the rear of the defined building line onto Three Stiles. Access is provided from the existing access road which lies between No’s 8 and 9 Three Stiles. The dwellings are proposed as two pairs of semis arranged in a row on an approximate north to south axis. Private amenity space is proposed to the rear of the dwellings and 9no. car parking spaces are proposed to the front, including a single disabled space.
1.4 The site currently provides pedestrian access to the rear of No’s 9, 9a, 10 and 10a Three Stiles and also includes a claimed right of way at the site’s north east corner which provides access onto the footpath and the surrounding open fields. Existing pedestrian and vehicular access arrangements are proposed to be retained as part of the development.
1.5 The proposal would result in the loss of 25 garages. Occupancy surveys carried out by the applicant revealed that 13 were empty and 12 were under hire. Of the 12 hired, 8 were used for general storage and 4 were used for parking vehicles. However, since the occupancy survey was undertaken, the applicant has ceased the availability of the garages on the site, terminating hire agreements with effect from March 31 st 2013. Consequently, none of the garages are currently available for vehicle parking or general storage.
1.6 The applicant has more recently submitted details of parking surveys that have been undertaken within Three Stiles and Blacksmiths Hill. The surveys were carried out on a Wednesday and Thursday morning at 04.00am hours. The surveys identified a total of 144 unrestricted parking spaces on Three Stiles and Blacksmiths Hill of which 102 were occupied on the Wednesday and 96 on the Thursday.
1.7 The application also contains a Tree Survey and Tree Quality Assessment. There are no trees within the application site. However, a mature Ash tree is located on neighbouring land to the north and a semi-mature Birch tree overhangs the western boundary. The Tree Quality Assessment advises that conditions to protect the trees during construction works are included with any permission granted.
1.8 Following concerns regarding design and layout, car parking, access and flooding, the applicants has provided a parking survey (as discussed above) and an amended site plan which shows additional planting at the site frontage. They have also sought to address matters relating to vehicular and pedestrian access into and within the site, the outlook for future occupiers and surface water drainage.
Page 171 3/12/2063/FP
2.0 Site History:
2.1 The site has been used for garaging for a significant period of time. Planning records do not reveal any recent or relevant planning applications on the site.
2.2 In 2012, two separate planning applications were approved with conditions on garage sites on Blacksmiths Hill. These comprised the following:
• 3/12/1716/FP - Land between 13-19 and 21-27 Blacksmiths Hill - Demolition of the existing garage blocks and erection of two storey detached block comprising 2 three bedroom houses together with private amenity space and car parking.
• 3/12/1862/FP - Land at 39-43 Blacksmiths Hill - Demolition of existing two garage blocks and erection of two storey detached block comprising 2no. 2-bedroom houses, together with private amenity space and car parking.
3.0 Consultation Responses:
3.1 The Environmental Health Department has recommended a condition relating to soil decontamination and advisory notes relating to construction hours of working and asbestos.
3.2 Affinity Water has not returned any comments.
3.3 Hertfordshire Biological Records Centre has advised that the development can proceed with caution. They recommend an Advisory Note to state that work must stop immediately should bats be found in the garages.
3.4 The Council’s Engineer has stated that the development site is not within Flood Zones 2 or 3 and that there have been no flood incidents recorded for the site. The development appears to show more permeable surfacing with a consequent decrease in the risk of associated flooding. Recommends sustainable drainage condition. Also, the development is adjacent to a watercourse, incorporating a trash screen that is currently maintained by the Council. The development should ensure that this trash screen can continue to be accessed.
3.5 County Highways have raised no objection to the proposal and have Page 172 3/12/2063/FP
recommended planning conditions to control on site surfacing, discharge of surface water and wheel washing facilities. In a highway context, there is no overriding safety reason to object to the development. Three Stiles is a typical residential estate road where on- street parking already takes place and is not prohibited. They are content that any displaced parking that may result from the garages would not impact upon the strategic highway network. Notwithstanding the loss of the garages, the scheme provides adequate parking for the development. They advise, however, that on street parking is near to capacity and a parking survey should be carried out to ascertain whether the displacement of cars can be accommodated on street. In response to the submitted parking survey, the survey should only take into account cars parked opposite each other when the road is greater than 6.1m in width and should not be counted when they are parked within 15m of an access that serves more than a single property. In response to concerns regarding access by emergency vehicles, County Highways have stated that for a development of 5 units or under, the Highway Authority would not request turning facilities within the site as access is onto a residential road.
3.6 The County Rights of Way Department has no comment to make on this application.
3.7 The Council’s Landscape Officer has recommended refusal. The layout of the development is poor and the frontages comprise mostly tarmac and a bin store. They raise concerns with the Tree Quality Assessment and the ability of the planting proposed to establish and survive in the locations shown. Concerns are also raised in relation the character of the area in terms of plot sizes, overdevelopment and the failure of the dwellings to assimilate well into the size and shape of the site.
3.8 The Council’s Environmental Services Department has not formally commented on the application. However, advice given previously in response to an earlier pre application confirms that for refuse vehicles to collect from within the site the collection point would need to be a maximum of 25m from the highway. As the collection point would be in excess of this, refuse vehicles would not be able to collect from within the site and bins would therefore need to be wheeled down to the edge of the highway.
3.9 Advice has been sought from the Council’s Building Control Department in conjunction with Hertfordshire Fire and Rescue Service with regard to access for emergency vehicles. They have advised that the narrow access to the site (3.0m) and the length of the access in excess of 20m means that a turning head would be required for emergency vehicles Page 173 3/12/2063/FP
(fire engines). As this is not provided, a comprehensive sprinkler system with detectors would be required within the dwellings in order to secure building regulations approval.
3.10 The Council’s Housing Manager has stated that a 100% affordable housing scheme providing 4 x 3 bed house meets the needs of the Housing Register in Benington.
3.11 Councillor Crofton has commented on the application stating that there is already an overcrowding of parked cars on the nearby highway. Dustcarts currently have to mount the pavement to access the road, which is often blocked, a situation which will only get worse should the development go ahead. Access for emergency vehicles is of major concern. Due weight should be given to neighbour concerns.
4.0 Town Council Representations:
4.1 Benington Parish Council originally expressed broad support for the development. However, later letters have expressed strong opposition to the application, with the following specific concerns raised:
• Proposed access road inadequate; • Benington Primary School ‘walking bus’ uses the access in the site to gain a way onto the main path; • Ownership of ground behind west block of garages in dispute; • Rear vehicular access to 10a Three Stiles removed; • Surface level of site higher than adjacent dwellings, causing a higher degree of intrusion; • Development will exacerbate flooding; • Refuse collection unsatisfactory; • Development will intensify parking problems
4.2 The Parish Council have endorsed the comments of a planning consultant who has written on behalf of nearby residents objecting to the proposal. These objections are detailed below.
5.0 Other Representations:
5.1 The application has been advertised by way of press notice, site notice and neighbour notification. Following receipt of a parking survey and an amended site plan, Members, relevant consultees, the Parish Council, and neighbouring residents were re-consulted.
5.2 In response to the original notification, individual letters of objection Page 174 3/12/2063/FP
were received from the occupiers of No’s 8, 9, 9a, 10a, 23, 46 and 49 Three Stiles and the occupier of Beech House, Duck Lane, Benington. Following receipt of amended plans and additional information, No’s 9, 9a and 10a Three Stiles and Beech House, Duck Lane have each reaffirmed their objections in writing to the proposal.
5.3 Letters of objection have also been received from a planning consultant in response to the original proposal and the amended plans/additional information. The letters are submitted on behalf of No’s 8, 9, and 10a Three Stiles and also enclose a petition signed by 136 local residents.
5.4 The objections raised can be summarised as follows:
• Loss of garages - Residents claim there is high demand for the garages and potential take-up of garages by residents has been denied by the applicants (South Anglia) over the last 5 years; • Impact on the local road network – Parking survey extremely limited and not representative of the true picture of the parking situation. Survey taken too broad an analysis; • Access to the site is prejudicial to highway and pedestrian safety; • Noise and disturbance - Vehicles using the access close to neighbouring boundaries will harm residential amenity; • Emergency Access, Servicing and Deliveries – The access road is unsatisfactory for Emergency Vehicles, Refuse and Delivery Vehicles; • Layout of the development results in a poor relationship between public and private areas. The retained public footpath will cause undue noise and disturbance to new occupiers and the access corridor retained for existing occupiers would afford no privacy to Plot 4; • Lack of crime prevention measures; • Development dominated by hardstanding; • Insufficient information relating to the protection of trees; • Fails to have regard to local distinctiveness - Development would form an isolated and uncoordinated urban extension of the clearly defined frontage; • Render will contrast poorly with other dwellings; • Fails to respect character and built appearance of surroundings; • Neighbour Impact – Over dominant and overbearing impact on neighbours; • Affects visual quality of countryside; • Will not preserve or enhance the character or appearance of the neighbouring Conservation Area; • Although similar development sites have been approved nearby, this site has significant drawbacks in comparison; Page 175 3/12/2063/FP
• Will exacerbate existing flooding problems; • Loss of access to rear gardens/garages on Three Stiles; • Loss of privacy; • Light pollution.
6.0 Policy:
6.1 The relevant ‘saved’ Local Plan policies in this application include the following:
OSV2 Category 2 Villages GBC3 Appropriate Development in the Rural Area Beyond the Green Belt HSG7 Replacement Dwellings and Infill Housing Development TR2 Access to New Developments TR7 Car Parking Standards ENV1 Design and Environmental Quality ENV2 Landscaping ENV11 Protection of Existing Trees and Hedgerows ENV16 Protected Species
6.2 The National Planning Policy Framework is also a material consideration in the determination of the application.
7.0 Considerations:
Principle
7.1 The site is located in the built up area of Benington, a Category 2 village within the Rural Area Beyond the Green Belt. Policy GBC3 (e) allows for limited infill development in Category 2 villages in accordance with Policy OSV2 (II).
7.2 Policy OSV2 states that infill housing development for housing which meets a local need may be permitted within the built up area of the village. The proposal is for 100% affordable housing and therefore would help to reduce the lengthy waiting lists in the District for such accommodation. It is supported by the Council’s Housing Manager.
7.3 Infill development is defined as follows on p178 of the Local Plan:
the erection of up to five small dwellings on a site within the built up area of the village, where such development can take place without damage to the character or appearance of the locality. Infill Page 176 3/12/2063/FP
development does not constitute the linking of two separate built up areas within a settlement, separated by a significant gap, or the consolidation of an isolated group of buildings ’
7.4 The site is located behind the established building line of dwellings following the north side of Three Stiles and does not therefore feature as a gap between two existing buildings that may more obviously have been identified as an infill site. However, the access to the site is between No’s 8 and 9 Three Stiles and as with the existing dwellings fronting directly onto Three Stiles, new occupiers would access their properties off this residential road.
7.5 In terms of its existing use, the site serves as garages for the existing dwellings on Three Stiles, some of which have until recently been used for domestic storage and vehicle parking. The site is previously developed land that has an intimate association with the existing dwellings on Three Stiles. Some of the dwellings, including No’s 9, 9a, 10 and 10a would retain existing access from the site to their rear gardens. A claimed public right of way would be retained for use by existing occupiers and the surrounding village.
7.6 As such, Officers consider that this previously developed site has an existing and retained relationship with the existing dwellings on Three Stiles and therefore is considered to be within the built up part of the village. It does not constitute the linking of two separate built up areas within a settlement or the consolidation of an isolated group of buildings. Accordingly, Officers adjudge the proposal to comprise infill development, of which there is no objection to in principle, subject to the development taking place without damage to the character and appearance of the locality.
7.7 Furthermore, the policies of the NPPF indicate that housing applications should be considered in the context of the presumption of in favour of sustainable development, especially where the Council is unable to provide a 5 year housing land supply.
7.8 Officers therefore consider that significant weight should be attached to the provision of this housing development within a sustainable rural location and which accords with the policies of the Local Plan.
Design Layout and Character
7.9 The site forms a parcel of land to the rear of dwellings on Three Stiles and, in this sense, the dwellings will not be read against the grain of development in the streetscene. Rather, they will create their own Page 177 3/12/2063/FP
sense of place behind the established building line.
7.10 There has been some concern raised that the dwellings will be isolated from existing dwellings and appear as an uncoordinated urban extension. However, as previously mentioned, the site is previously developed land that has most recently been in residential use for domestic storage. The dwellings would not extend into the open countryside and would utilise an existing access road, retaining an essential link to the Three Stiles frontage. Furthermore, the dwellings would be two-storey, semi-detached dwellings with pitched roofs and therefore be of a style and size that is similar to those fronting onto Three Stiles. Existing connections with surrounding development are retained, including a claimed right of way leading into the fields behind that is used by the primary school ‘walking bus’ as well as access from the site to the rear gardens of No’s 9, 9a, 10 and 10a Three Stiles. Overall therefore, whilst the site forms a backland location, it is considered to be satisfactorily integrated with the existing dwellings on Three Stiles.
7.11 In terms of design and appearance, the dwellings are arranged in a row as two pairs of semi detached dwellings of a height and scale similar to those already on Three Stiles. Materials are proposed to be a base brick with light render at first floor and concrete roof tiles. Officers are satisfied that appropriate materials can be agreed by condition. As a backland site, the dwellings would not be widely visible from Three Stiles. The nearest dwelling, (Plot 4) would retain a gap of over 40m to the road and 26m to the nearest dwelling. As such, Officers consider that the impact of the development on the wider character of the village would be limited and that the development would not detract from the character of the streetscene.
7.12 There has been some concern that the introduction of two storey structures would impact upon the rural area. However, the dwellings would not encroach into the open countryside and would be arranged as a line in the central part of the site. Whilst the dwellings would undoubtedly be visible from the access road and from some of the dwellings on Three Stiles, existing views of the countryside beyond would be substantially retained. In terms of impact, the dwellings would be of similar size to those already on Three Stiles, and would not appear uncharacteristically large or imposing so as to detract from the appearance of the village, the visual quality of the countryside or the adjoining Conservation Area. Existing trees on the northern boundary are proposed for retention and would obscure the dwellings from views from the north west.
Page 178 3/12/2063/FP
7.13 In terms of layout, it is noted that the site is of an awkward shape to develop. However, the construction of 4 semi-detached dwellings arranged in a row is considered to make best use of previously developed land and can be achieved without significant harm to the character and appearance of the area. As a backland site, it is important that the development creates a cohesive and legible urban environment – a sense of place for new occupiers. Officers consider that this is achieved successfully. The dwellings sit comfortably within the site and each dwelling is provided with a reasonable level of internal and external amenity space. A high degree of natural surveillance is available throughout and the submission of amended plans now ensures the frontage will benefit from a degree of planting, which will soften the hardstanding that is necessary to provide the required parking. In total, the overall amount of impermeable surfacing is reduced. Importantly, the dwellings would retain an active connection to the Three Stiles frontage by retaining a claimed right of way to the north of plot 1 for access to the footpath and fields behind the site.
7.14 Overall, Officers consider that the development would be sensitively designed, respecting the character and visual quality of the area and being satisfactorily integrated into the village. Moreover, the development would provide much needed affordable housing on previously developed land in a sustainable village location.
Parking and Access
7.15 Concerns have been raised regarding the loss of the garages and the level of displacement parking that would occur on Three Stiles. In total, the development would result in the loss of 25 garages on the site. The applicant has stated that a garage occupancy survey had previously revealed that 13 of these garages were void and 12 were under hire. Of the 12 previously hired, 8 were used for general storage and 4 were used for parking vehicles, with 2 garage hirers failing to respond. As such, a total of 6 garages could potentially have been used for vehicle storage.
7.16 The concerns that have been raised by local residents and the Parish Council in respect of parking have been considered. Officers understand the concerns in respect of parking within the street and the amount of on-street parking has been witnessed during Officer site visits.
7.17 In order to ascertain whether the level of displacement parking could be absorbed in the surrounding road network, the applicants commissioned a Parking Beat Survey. Two surveys were undertaken Page 179 3/12/2063/FP
on consecutive Wednesday and Thursday mornings at 04.00am. The early morning hour is designed to ensure that the survey results reflect the maximum take-up of parking rather than being carried out during the day or at weekends when residents may ordinarily be elsewhere. The survey revealed a total of 144 unrestricted parking spaces on Three Stiles and Blacksmiths Hill and an average take-up of spaces of 69% when taken over the two days. It was evident, according to the survey, that there was capacity for an additional 45 cars to park on the nearby road network. Furthermore, the survey also states that although it can’t be considered as ‘unrestricted parking’, there is considerably more space available on the kerb which could be used for vehicles to park, if necessary. Parking on the kerb was observed on the parking survey and can be achieved without impediment to passing vehicles. The parking survey therefore reveals that there is sufficient parking to accommodate the displacement of 25 garages, and certainly sufficient to accommodate the displacement of the 6 vehicles that the occupancy survey revealed to use the garages.
7.18 There are, it should be noted, constraints to the survey. Firstly, it included all unrestricted parking spaces throughout the entire length of Three Stiles and Blacksmiths Hill. This is a long distance and is beyond which some people would be prepared to walk. Secondly, County Highways have revealed that the parking survey should only take into account cars parked opposite each other when the road width is greater than 6.1m. This would discount much of Three Stiles and Blacksmiths Hill, which are only approximately 5.5m in width. The parking survey revealed an average available parking capacity of 45 cars. Taking into account a worst case scenario where only half the unrestricted spaces were available due to the width of the road, this would leave 22 available spaces. Whilst this is not sufficient to accommodate the displacement of 25 garages, it is clearly more than sufficient to accommodate the displacement of the 6 garages found to be previously occupied. Furthermore, it should be noted that neither Three Stiles or Blacksmiths Lane have parking restrictions, and cars frequently mount the kerb in order to be able to park opposite each other so as not to impede passing traffic. This is likely to continue and, if assumed to be the case, it would effectively provide considerably more than 22 available parking spaces.
7.19 Officers also note that the applicant has now served termination notices to all residents with hire agreements on the garages. As of 31 st March 2013, the applicant has taken possession of the garages and they are no longer used for vehicle or general storage. Consequently, as the proposed development provides 9no car parking spaces for the 4 dwellings in line with the maximum requirements of the Council’s SPD Page 180 3/12/2063/FP
on Parking Standards, it is not expected that the proposed development would cause a greater intensification of parking on the nearby network than currently exists. As such, given the garages are no longer available to residents, there is no reason, in Officers view, why the development would impact on the availability of parking for existing residents.
7.20 It is also noted that County Highways have stated that there is no overriding highway safety reason to object to the development. Three Stiles is a typical residential estate road where on-street parking already takes place and is not prohibited. Having examined the proposal and accompanying parking survey, County Highways are content that any displaced parking that may have resulted from the garages would not impact upon the strategic highway network.
7.21 Turning now to the access arrangements to the site. The proposed development would utilize the existing access from Three Stiles. The access road is approximately 38m in length and varies between 3.0m and 3.8m in width. The site is well established for vehicular access having been used as a garage site for many years. Officers consider that the use of this access by resident’s vehicles will not be any more intensive than has previously been the case. County Highways are satisfied that there are no overriding safety issues or problems with visibility.
7.22 It is acknowledged by the applicant that the access road would not meet building regulations requirements with regard to access by emergency vehicles, namely fire engines. Whilst not a planning issue, the applicant intends to address this by installing a sprinkler system within the dwellings. It is Officers understanding, having liaised with the Council’s Building Control Department, that this can be an acceptable solution. As such, whilst access for emergency vehicles is a legitimate concern, it is Officers understanding that a way forward is possible and that the negotiation of this is a matter for separate legislation and control.
7.23 It is also noted that a similar problem would occur for refuse vehicles, which would also not be able to access the site. This will result in residents needing to transport their bins down the access road on collection day, a distance of approximately 50m. Whilst this is not an ideal scenario, it is not an uncommon situation for other residences within the district, for example, those with long private driveways or other sites with long and narrow access roads. As such, Officers do not consider that this can be held up as a reason to refuse the application. To ensure that all alternative refuse storage options have been considered, a condition is recommended to agree the refuse storage Page 181 3/12/2063/FP
details with the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of the development.
7.24 There have been some concerns raised in relation to the loss of the claimed public right of way at the north east corner of the site and about the access availability to the rear of No’s 9, 9a, 10 and 10a Three Stiles, particularly with regard to the occupier of No.10a. The applicant has sought to confirm that all the pedestrian access points will be maintained as part of the development and Officers have included a condition to ensure the claimed right of way is retained for use by the wider community including the primary school walking bus for the lifetime of the development. The applicant is also proposing the use of bollard lighting to aid wayfinding for users of the claimed right of way. This is welcomed by Officers but it is recommended that the lighting details be agreed by condition to ensure, inter alia, that future occupiers are not adversely affected.
7.25 With regard to the access to the rear of the dwellings, it is noted that the development would create a narrower pedestrian access to the rear of No’s 10 and 10a Three Stiles. However, whilst I note that No.10a is concerned about motorbike access to the rear, I note that this property has a front driveway that can accommodate this in addition to two cars.
7.26 Overall therefore, Officers do not consider that the proposed development would result in harm to highway or pedestrian safety or that it would compromise parking ability for existing dwellings on Three Stiles. With regard to existing connections, the applicant has sought to retain existing accesses, including the claimed right of way leading to the fields to the rear.
Landscaping and Trees
7.27 The Council’s Landscape Officer has registered concern about the layout of the development, which is considered to be dominated by hardstanding. The applicant acknowledges that this is the case but argues that the amount of hardstanding is necessary in order to deliver 9no car parking spaces to Council standards. The amended plans have improved the layout by delivering additional planting to soften the dwelling frontages. Precise details of hard and soft landscaping can be agreed by condition.
7.28 Officers consider that the overall layout is acceptable and makes good use of previously developed land. Given the parking concerns expressed by neighbouring residents, it is not considered that a reduction in the amount of hardstanding and consequently the number Page 182 3/12/2063/FP
of car parking spaces is a sustainable alternative. The existing site is all comprised of hardstanding and the new layout would substantially increase the amount of green space within the site. Furthermore, the site would not be visible from the Three Stiles itself and thus would have a limited impact on the character of the streetscene.
7.29 In terms of trees, all existing trees are proposed for retention. The trees are located outside of the site and adjacent to the north and west boundaries. They feature as a pleasant green boundary between the site and the adjoining Conservation Area and countryside behind. An accompanying Tree Quality Assessment notes that there are two trees of note – a mature Ash tree located to the north and a semi-mature Birch tree overhanging the western boundary.
7.30 The Tree Quality Assessment states that the removal of the western block of garages should be subject to a method statement to ensure that care is taken to protect the overhanging ash tree. Tree protection measures should be undertaken to ensure the protection of both significant trees. It may be possible to retain some of the existing hardstanding, albeit re-surfaced, which would aid the protection of the trees. If not, measures should be undertaken to ensure the tree’s root system is not harmed during the re-laying of the surface.
7.31 Whilst the Council’s Landscape Officer has registered concerns about the lack of information, it should be noted that the trees lie off site and are not protected by Tree Preservation Orders. The Tree Quality Assessment has stated that the trees can be protected and appropriate conditions have been added to the recommendation to ensure this is the case. Furthermore, the introduction of additional planting within the site can be agreed by an appropriate soft landscaping condition and would ensure that, overall, the development would enhance the character and appearance of the site in landscape terms.
Neighbour Amenity
7.32 The impact that the development would have upon the neighbouring properties in terms of potential loss of light, privacy, outlook and any overbearing impact has been considered. The existing garages are of a modest size and height. The redevelopment of the site for 4no. 2 storey dwellings will inevitably change the visual impact of the site and the relationship that it has with neighbouring sites. However, it is the degree of the impact upon neighbouring occupiers that has to be assessed and a judgment made as to whether the impact is of such a degree as to warrant the refusal of the application.
Page 183 3/12/2063/FP
7.33 Neighbouring dwellings are located to the south of the site. Whilst concerns have been raised about a possible overbearing impact, the arrangement of the dwellings on an approximate north to south axis will reduce the bulk and massing of the development when viewed from the rear of the closest affected dwellings. In addition, the distance retained to the nearest dwellings would be in excess of 26m and would ensure, in Officers view, that the development does not cause a significant overbearing impact on the amenities of these residents. Officers note that no first floor side facing windows are proposed in the dwellings that may have resulted in an overlooking impact and as such, Officers are also satisfied that the nearest residents would not suffer a loss of privacy.
7.34 There has also been some concern about noise and disturbance resulting from the movements of vehicles to and from the site. The development proposes 4 dwellings with 9no car parking spaces. When compared with the use of the site for garaging, with provision for 25 vehicles, Officers consider that there would not be an intensification of movement that would give rise to additional noise and disturbance.
7.35 With regard to future occupiers, concerns have been raised in relation to the privacy of occupiers that would result from use of the public access points surrounding the site. Whilst there may be some visibility into kitchen windows at Plots 1 and 4 resulting from access to the claimed right of way and the rear of No’s 10 and 10a Three Stiles, these movements would be sporadic and would not give rise to a permanent loss of privacy. There is also the added benefit of additional natural surveillance arising from this arrangement, which is not unlike relationships between dwellings and footpaths in more built up areas.
7.36 Accordingly, Officers are content that the development would not cause harm to the amenities of existing or future occupiers.
Other matters
7.37 There have been concerns raised in relation to the drainage of the site and existing residents have remarked upon flooding issues. Officers note that there is an un-named watercourse to the north of the site and a trash screen that is regularly maintained by the Council. Officers note that access to this will be maintained by use of the claimed right of way.
7.38 Overall, the development is outside of designated flood zones. Although the site is elevated from Three Stiles, the development would reduce the amount of impermeable paving and thus the Council’s Engineer is satisfied that there will be a net reduction in the risk of Page 184 3/12/2063/FP
flooding at the site and on neighbouring land. To ensure this, Officers have recommended that a sustainable drainage scheme is submitted for approval by the LPA prior to the occupation of the new dwellings.
8.0 Conclusion:
8.1 Having regard to the representations made by consultees and local residents, Officers consider that on balance the details submitted for the proposed development are acceptable and would result in a sustainable form of development in compliance with the NPPF and the Local Plan. It would contribute towards the councils 5 year housing land supply and affordable housing provision and significant weight should be attached to this. Furthermore, the layout and appearance of the proposed development is considered to be acceptable and it would not, in Officers view, be detrimental to the visual quality of the area; the amenities of neighbouring residents or have any adverse impact on highway safety in the area.
8.2 Given these matters, and the presumption in favour of sustainable development in the NPPF, officers recommend that planning permission be granted for the proposed development subject to the conditions recommended at the head of this report.
Page 185 This page is intentionally left blank
Page 186
Benington 3
2 Church of England
2 Primary School 8
NNNEEE L LLAAANNNEEE DDD KKK L LL DDD CCCKKK DDD UUUCCCKKK AAA DDDUUU AAA DDD AAA OOO OOO OOO RRR R R R R R R
NNN NNN NNN RRR RRR RRR E E E E E E E E E KKK KKK KKK L L L L L L L L L AAA AAA AAA
WWW WWW WWW
Stretton House
WALKERN SITE ROAD
Hall 5
3
1 2
1
The Lodge
21 22
15 20 a 11
10 10 2
a 2
9 8 S 7 h 9 e l te r 1
1 2 LLLEEESSS SSSTTTIILILLEEE to 3 SSSTTT EEE 11 RRREEEEEE
TTTHHHRRR
5 TTTHHH
1 2
13 to 19
5
2
5 4
7 3 4
7 BBBLLLAAACCCKKKSSSMMMIITITTHHHSSS
BBBLLLAAACCCKKKSSSMMMIITITTHHHSSS HHHIILILLLL
3 4
TTT 4 2 TTTOOO 8
OOOWWW
2 WWWNNN
NNN 5 NNN L LL 0 L LLAAA AAANNN NNNEEE
The Croft 13
5 2
1
6 17 9
25 27
41 Tel Ex
5
5
9 0
2 1 4 1 TOWN LANE
This copy has been produced specifically for Map Control Scheme purposes only. No further copies may be made Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown Copyright and may lead to prosecution or civil proceedings Reproduced from the Ordnance Survey map data with the permission of the controller of Her Majesty's Stationery Office Crown Copyright 2009 East Herts Council. LA Ref: 100018528 (
East Herts Council Address: Garage site to the North of 9, Three Stiles, Benington, SG2 7LD Wallfields Reference: 3/12/2063/FP Pegs Lane Hertford Scale: 1:2500 SG13 8EQ O.S Sheet: TL3023 Tel: 01279 655261 Date of Print: 25 July 2013 Page 187 This page is intentionally left blank
Page 188 Agenda Item 5j 5j 3/13/0714/FP – Construction of detached dwelling at Camelot, 9, Church End, Braughing, SG11 2QA for Mr J Haworth
Date of Receipt: 08.05.2013 Type: Full – Minor
Parish: BRAUGHING
Ward: BRAUGHING
RECOMMENDATION:
That planning permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:-
1. Three Year Time Limit (1T12)
2. Programme of Archeological Work (2E02)
3. Levels (2E05)
4. Boundary Walls and Fences (2E07)
5. Approved Plans (2E10) (Location Plan, MW1221 03 B, MW1221 04 A)
6. Samples of Materials (2E12)
7. Obscured glazing (2E18) Insert “to bedroom 2 in the first floor south facing flank elevation and the bathroom in the first floor east facing rear elevation”, delete “and fixed shut”
8. Tree/hedge retention and protection (4P05)
9. Landscape Design Proposals (4P12)
10. Landscape works implementation (4P13)
11. Hours of Working - Plant and Machinery (6N05)
Directives:
1. Other Legislation (01OL)
2. Street Naming and Numbering (19SN)
3. Unsuspected Contamination (33UC)
Page 189 3/13/0714/FP
Summary of Reasons for Decision
East Herts Council has considered the applicant’s proposal in a positive and proactive manner with regard to the policies of the Development Plan (Minerals Local Plan, Waste Core Strategy and Development Management Policies DPD 2012 and the ’saved’ policies of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007); the National Planning Policy Framework and in accordance with the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2012 (as amended). The balance of the considerations having regard to those policies is that permission should be granted.
(071413FP.FM)
1.0 Background:
1.1 The application site is shown on the attached OS extract. Camelot is a detached 2 storey dwellinghouse that has been constructed in red brick, render and weatherboarding. It is set centrally within its plot and has a large garden curtilage. A detached garage is sited over 10 metres from the entrance of the site off Church End. The front elevation of Camelot faces north, towards the highway but is screened from the street scene by mature landscaping along the northern boundary. The site lies within Braughing a category 1 village in Local Plan terms.
1.2 The application proposes the erection of a detached three bedroom dwellinghouse within the curtilage of Camelot. The proposed dwelling would be sited to the south of the existing property and the existing plot would be divided generally from east to west, but enabling access to the proposed property from the north. The proposed dwelling would have its principle elevation facing west and would in part be 2 storeys in height and have facing materials of brick and render. The proposed dwelling would be afforded front and rear amenity space. An area of off-street parking for both the existing dwelling and the proposed dwelling would be provided.
2.0 Site History:
2.1 Camelot has previously been granted planning permission for various extensions and outbuildings.
3.0 Consultation Responses:
3.1 The Council’s Conservation Officer recommends approval of the application and comments that due to the siting of the proposal, to the Page 190 3/13/0714/FP
rear (south) of Camelot and due to the built and green character of the area, the proposed dwelling would have little visual impact upon the appearance of the wider Conservation Area or the setting of St Mary’s Church. It is also considered that the mass and scale of the proposed dwelling is subservient to that of Camelot and as such would not dominate the immediate setting; the design is also reflective of the wider area.
3.2 The Councils Landscape Officer has recommended refusal and raises concerns that the proposal fails to respect the local landscape character and local distinctiveness in the area surrounding the church. It is considered that the layout is symptomatic of an overdevelopment of the existing plot, which in essence has been poorly subdivided with the eastern half of the plot not being considered. The Officer also refers to the lack of the submission of a tree survey.
3.3 The Historic Environment Unit comment the proposed site is located in the historic core of Braughing and in Area of archaeological Significance No60 as identified the Local plan. Having regard to this location, it is considered that the proposed development is likely to have an impact on heritage assets of archaeological interest. They therefore recommend that a condition is attached to any grant of permission requiring the implementation of a programme archaeological works.
3.4 Hertfordshire Biological Records Centre conclude that there are no known ecological constraints regarding the proposed development and the application can be determined accordingly.
3.5 Hertfordshire County Highways have commented that they do not wish to restrict the grant of permission. The Highways Officer comments that the scheme proposes to use the existing vehicle access at a point where appropriate visibility splays can be provided and there have been no accidents recorded in the last five years. A suitable level of parking and turning space within the site is provided.
3.6 The Council’s Environmental Health team does not wish to restrict the grant of permission subject to a condition relating to construction hours of working.
4.0 Parish Council Representations:
4.1 Braughing Parish Council objects to the proposal and raises concerns that the proposal would appear obtrusive and overbearing in its surroundings, with the loss of open land having an impact upon the Page 191 3/13/0714/FP
character and appearance of the street scene and that the height of the dwelling would be overbearing. Further concerns are raised with the impact of the proposal on the Braughing Conservation Area and the setting and views of the adjacent Grade I Listed church.
5.0 Other Representations:
5.1 The application has been advertised by way of press notice, site notice and neighbour notification.
5.2 Eleven letters of objection have been received raising the following concerns:
• Would be infilling within the heart of the village and would set a precedent for further development; • Would create more parking problems; • Would appear unduly prominent and detrimental to the character and appearance of the area and the Conservation Area; • Would be overdevelopment of the site; • The proposed building is too tall and will have an adverse visual impact; • Would fail to respect the amenity of neighbouring properties; • Is not sited well in relation to surrounding buildings; • Inappropriate access for building works; • The village does not need a large detached house; • Detrimental to the setting of the adjacent Grade I Listed Church.
5.3 Braughing Society objects to the proposal and comment that the proposal by reason of its siting and extent would appear unduly prominent and detrimental to the character and appearance of the Braughing Conservation Area. It also considers that the proposal would represent overdevelopment of the site; would have an adverse visual impact due to its height; would be obtrusive; would not be of a design that would compliment the surroundings; would fail to respect neighbour amenity; access for construction traffic would be difficult and harmful.
6.0 Policy:
6.1 The relevant ‘saved’ Local Plan policies in this application include the following:
HSG7 Infill Housing Development ENV1 Design and Environmental Quality Page 192 3/13/0714/FP
ENV2 Landscaping ENV14 Local Sites ENV16 Protected Species BH1 Archaeology and New Development BH2 Archaeological Evaluations and Assessments BH3 Archaeological Conditions and Agreements BH6 New Developments in Conservation Areas TR7 Car Parking – Standards OSV1 Category 1 Village
6.2 In addition, national planning policy as set out in the National Planning Policy Framework is relevant. Locally, a Braughing Conservation Area Character Statement was produced by the Council in 1995 and has been taken into account. The content of the Braughing Parish Design Statement has also been taken into account.
7.0 Considerations:
7.1 The site is located within the built up area of the Category 1 Village of Braughing wherein policy OSV1 states that limited infill housing development may be permitted provided that the proposal would not be significantly detrimental to neighbour amenity, that the location does not represent a significant open space or gap important to the form and setting of the village, that the proposal would not block important views and vistas and that the housing is appropriately designed and well integrated within the surrounding area. Similar criteria are established in policy HSG7 and ENV1. Given the location of the site within the village the provision of one dwelling is considered to be acceptable in principle. However, it is necessary to test the impact of the proposals against the requirements of the policies as set out in the Local Plan, including those relating to the Conservation Area location, and to take into account any other material issues.
Character and Appearance
7.2 It is proposed to divide the existing plot from east to west (with provision for access) and to site the dwelling to the south of the existing dwellinghouse. The front elevation of the proposed dwelling would not extend any further forward than the west facing elevation of Camelot. The proposed dwelling would have an area of patio to the frontage and would have a generous rear garden area, measuring over 600m 2.
7.3 The existing dwelling on the plot, Camelot, would still retain a larger rear garden space of over 1000m 2. The applicant explains that a location to the east of the existing dwelling was considered, but Page 193 3/13/0714/FP
discounted as the selected layout enables any future occupier of the proposed dwelling to enjoy views outward toward the church tower.
7.4 Concerns have been raised by local residents that such a layout, together with the scale of the proposed dwelling would not be appropriate for the character and appearance of the locality and would constitute overdevelopment of the site. The proposed dwelling, discounting the existing outbuilding to Camelot which is to be included into the new plot, would have a footprint of 125m 2. The size of the proposed dwelling in relation to the plot size could not be considered unduly at odds with the varied arrangement of house types and plot sizes in the vicinity. What is less usual is the location of the proposed dwelling ‘behind’ the existing house. However, this layout assists with ensuring that the visual impact of the proposed unit is minimised. With the existing frontage house and planting, it is likely that views of the new dwelling from Church End will be limited to the area in the vicinity of the access and from the raised churchyard area beyond.
7.5 The main ridge of the proposed house is approx 7.3m in height. From the frontage those views which are available will be of a chalet style house, with a two storey projecting front gable. The proposed house would be some 1.8 metres lower in height than the existing dwelling on the plot.
7.6 The design of the proposed dwelling is traditional, with a hipped roof and 2 storey front and rear gable elements that would be set down from the main roof ridge line of the proposed dwelling by 0.6 metres. A total of three dormer windows which are of a modest size and scale are also proposed within the roof slope of the dwelling (one to each of east, west and south elevations). Detailing such as ground floor bay windows and a chimney are also proposed which add architectural interest to the proposed dwelling.
7.7 Whilst the proposals introduce a further dwelling into this area of the village, it is considered that the resulting plot sizes remain acceptable in relation to the dwellings and enable both to be assimilated into the character of the area. There will be views toward views toward the new dwelling from Church End but these will be limited. The location is not identified as a significant gap or vista in the Conservation Area Character Statement or the Parish Design Statement. It is considered that the more important views to be had are those from public locations toward the church and its associated setting. It is not considered that the location or scale of the proposals are such that they are harmful therefore and can be judged positively against the criteria set out in the Local Plan policies. The retention of the green frontage area to the Page 194 3/13/0714/FP
existing dwelling, with no greater access requirements, also assist in minimising its impact.
7.8 Policy BH6 requires development in Conservation Areas to be sympathetic in terms of scale, height, proportion, form, materials and siting in relation to the general character of the area. The concerns raised by local residents and Braughing Parish Council in respect of the proposal having a harmful impact on the character and appearance of the Braughing Conservation Area have been noted. In her assessment the Council’s Conservation Officer has been mindful of the features that are important to the character of the area; most importantly here the church and other listed buildings.
7.9 Officers have considered carefully the Conservation Area Character Assessment and the Parish Design Statement. The former notes that the special character of The Hoppits, as this part of the road is known, is defined by the raised level of the churchyard. The proposals will not compete with this defining character. Indeed it is unlikely that there are public locations where both the new dwelling and the churchyard will be seen in the same views. In the Parish Design Statement it is set out that “The character and appearance we wish to preserve and enhance is perhaps best demonstrated by The Square and Church End, close packed houses of many different periods, with no uniform width of frontage and no common roofline, constructed in different styles of varied materials using a range of techniques”. It is considered that the proposed dwelling contributes to this lack of uniformity.
7.10 As indicated, the Church, sited on levels that are slightly elevated above the street scene and the application site, remains the dominant building in the area, establishing the historic character. Whilst views from the church to the proposed dwelling will be possible, it will be located at over 30 metres distant at its closest. Views in this direction are not considered to be a defining feature of the Conservation Area. The property will be seen adjacent to existing landscaping and the roofscape of other dwellings. It is considered to be subservient to the existing dwelling. Whilst views toward it will be possible it is not considered necessary or appropriate to hide all development in the Conservation Area.
7.11 In summary, Officers consider that the proposal would not detract from the immediate or wider character and appearance of the Conservation Area or the setting of the nearby Listed Buildings, including St Mary’s Church, in accordance with Policy BH6 of the Local Plan and Section 12 of the National Planning Policy Framework. It is considered then that the character of the Conservation Area is maintained. Page 195 3/13/0714/FP
7.12 Set against the views of the Conservation Officer, the concerns of the Council’s Landscape Officer have been noted. In reaching his views, he set out that the concern he has in relation to the impact of the proposals was symptomatic of a poor decision in relation to the sub division of the site. That is, a preferable sub division would be north- south with new development placed on the east side of the plot. Whilst it is acknowledged this would provide a more conventional relationship with the road frontage, this would require the creation of a further access and greater loss of frontage planting. It is more likely also that this would lead to development with a greater degree of uniformity, something which the Parish Design Statement identifies as not appropriate. The judgement to be made here however is not whether there is a more preferable scheme, but whether the proposals being put forward are acceptable.
7.13 In this case, the lack of a tree impact assessment report, as referred to by the Landscape Officer is not considered to be harmful. The site of the proposed new dwelling contains shrub rather than significant tree planting. The other matter raised by consultees, namely the requirement for a programme of archaeological works, can be implemented through an appropriate condition.
Impact upon neighbour amenity
7.14 Immediately to the south of the site are existing dwellings known as Ashridge and Magdalens which are 1 ½ storeys in height. In respect of Ashridge, the south facing flank elevation of the proposed dwelling would be sited at approx 25m to the rear of the rear elevation of that property. The flank wall is approx 12.5m in extent. Presently there is a walled boundary to part of this side of the plot and hedging within the Ashridge curtilage. Whilst the proposed dwelling will undoubtedly have an impact in relation to the views to be had from Ashridge, the intervening distance, existing boundary treatment and angled relationship between the properties are such that it is not considered to result in significant harm. Privacy is satisfactorily maintained by the installation of only one window at first floor level which would be fitted with obscure glazing.
7.15 Turning then to the relationship between the proposed dwelling and Magdalens. In this case, there would remain an intervening distance of over 20 metres between the rear elevation of the proposed dwelling and that of the main rear elevation of Magdalens. The boundary treatment is more open here, a post and rail fence at present, however Magdalens is orientated more to views of the rear garden of the proposed house and its rear elevation, rather than the flank wall. Page 196 3/13/0714/FP
7.16 The closest window at first floor is to a bathroom and can be obscure glazed. There is a further window to a landing/ corridor area and an outside balcony area. This outdoor area is modest, less than a metre in depth and under 3m in width. It is unlikely to be a location which is used significantly for sitting out and therefore unlikely to harmfully impact on privacy.
7.17 The rear elevation of the proposed dwelling would also retain a distance of some 30 metres to the nearest dwelling to the rear (east) of the site, no 6 Orchard House. Taking this into account and the mature landscaping that is sited along the rear site boundary and between the proposed dwelling and No6, the proposed development would not result in any significant harm to the amenities of the residents of no 6.
7.18 Lastly, it is considered that sufficient spacing would be available between the proposed dwelling and the existing building such that the proposed dwelling would not have an unacceptable overbearing impact on the occupiers of Camelot. There is likely to be a degree of overlooking between the plots, but this is not considered to be greater than the common inter-relationship between adjoining plots.
Access and Parking
7.19 In respect of access, the existing vehicle entrance that is used to access Camelot, off Church End would be utilised. The Highways Authority does not raise any objections to the proposal, it is considered to be acceptable in a highways context, with sufficient provision of parking and space for vehicle turning included within the site. The proposal would not therefore be detrimental to highway safety or capacity.
7.20 In relation to parking provision, the existing detached garage and the area of hard-standing to the west of the current dwelling would be available for the proposed dwelling. An area of hard-standing to the north of the existing dwelling, with space to park four vehicles. would be retained for the existing dwelling. This gives 7 spaces overall for the two dwellings. The Vehicle Parking Standards, as set out in the East Herts Local Plan, require a maximum of 2.25 spaces per 3 bedroom dwelling and a maximum of 3 spaces for a dwelling with four or more bedrooms. So 5.25 spaces would be required. Officers therefore consider the parking provision proposed to be acceptable in this case.
8.0 Conclusion:
8.1 The proposals have been considered carefully in relation to their impact Page 197 3/13/0714/FP
on the character and appearance of the area and in relation to the integrity of the Conservation Area. The chosen location, whilst not conventional in relationship to the street frontage, acts to significantly reduce the impact that the insertion of new development may otherwise have.
8.2 It is acknowledged that the new property will be visible in the Conservation Area. However, this by itself is not a reason to justify withholding permission. It is considered that its visual and character impact will be acceptable and that it will not compete with the attributes which most strongly define the Conservation Area.
8.3 There are no other issues identified which are considered to have an unacceptably harmful impact and therefore, for the reasons set out above Officers recommend that planning permission is granted, subject to the conditions set out at the head of this report.
Page 198 18
1 DDD 7 DDD NNN EEE
HHH CCC RRR UUU R HHH o HHH SITE bin CCC C ott
age
1 3
3
St Mary's Church 4 5
1 1
2 THETHE
SQUARESQUARE 5 SQUARESQUARE
6
7
1
8 Camelot 3 1 1 H
all 9
7 1 4
6 3 PH
4 TTT
EEE 1 2
3 EEE a EEE RR
TTT 3 TTT
SSS SSS 8 S SS EEE
HH 1 TTT
M 1 a g d a A 7 l s e 9 h n
r s id 2
g
2 e
1 6
Church 8
1 4
EE 1 EEE Old School Place NNN NNN 4
HHH HHH HHH
I I I I I I ILILIL LLL LLL LLL 1 LLL
LLL QQUU
C C
C UU C C
C UU C C
C IIINN L L
L NN L L L
L L
L CC 2
O O
O CC O O
O OO O O
O OOUU
S S S
5 UU
S S
S UU
S S
S RR
E E
E TT
E E
E TT E E E TT 3 This copy has been produced specifically for Map Control Scheme purposes only. No further copies may be made Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown Copyright and may lead to prosecution or civil proceedings Reproduced from the Ordnance Survey map data with the permission of the controller of Her Majesty's Stationery Office Crown Copyright 2009 East Herts Council. LA Ref: 100018528 (
East Herts Council Address: Camelot, 9, Church End, Braughing, Ware, Herts, SG11 2QA Wallfields Reference: 3/13/0714/FP Pegs Lane Hertford Scale: 1:1250 SG13 8EQ O.S Sheet: TL3925 Tel: 01279 655261 Date of Print: 24 July 2013 Page 199 This page is intentionally left blank
Page 200 Agenda Item 5k 5k 3/13/1003/FP – Change of use of outbuilding to residential annex at White House Lodge, Hare Street, Buntingford, SG9 0DX for Ms A Stewart
Date of Receipt: 17.06.2013 Type: Full – Householder/Other
Parish: HORMEAD
Ward: BRAUGHING
RECOMMENDATION:
That planning permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:
1. Three year time limit (1T121)
2. The residential annexe facility hereby permitted shall not be occupied at any time other than for purposes ancillary to the residential use of the dwelling known as White House Lodge.
Reason: To ensure the Local Planning Authority retains control over any future residential development and in accordance with Policy ENV8 of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007.
3. Approved plans (2E102) (insert Location Plan, Site Plan, Plan 1, Plan 2)
Directive:
1. Other legislation (01OL1)
Summary of Reasons for Decision
East Herts Council has considered the applicant’s proposal in a positive and proactive manner with regard to the policies of the Development Plan (Minerals Local Plan, Waste Core Strategy and Development Management Policies DPD 2012 and the ’saved’ policies of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007; the National Planning Policy Framework and in accordance with the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2012 (as amended). The balance of the considerations having regard to those policies is that permission should be granted.
(100313FP.MP)
1.0 Background:
1.1 The application site is shown on the attached OS extract. Access to the site is off the main road – the B1368 via a narrow driveway. The Page 201 3/13/1003/FP
dwelling, which is a grade II listed building, is located adjacent to the southern boundary of the site. A detached timber clad outbuilding is set around five metres from the dwelling. Further to the west of the site are stables and meadow land which is used for equestrian activities.
1.2 The proposal involves the conversion of the existing outbuilding which is located to the west of the dwelling. The building was previously granted planning permission as a shed and this current application seeks to use the outbuilding as an annex to the main dwellinghouse. The proposed works would provide residential accommodation which would include 1 bedroom with en-suite bathroom and an open plan living room and kitchen. The building has a footprint of 35square metres.
2.0 Site History:
2.1 The relevant planning history relating to this application is LPA references 3/07/2694/FP – planning permission was granted for the erection of a garden shed with a planning condition restricting the use of the building for purposes incidental to the enjoyment of the dwelling.
3.0 Consultation Responses:
3.1 The Conservation Officer recommends that planning permission be granted. The Conservation Officer comments that the proposed change of use of the building will not alter the external appearance of the outbuilding and will therefore not impact upon the setting of the heritage asset.
3.2 Herts County Council Highways Authority comment that they do not wish to restrict the grant of planning permission. The Highways Officer comments that the change of use is acceptable on the provision that the annex remains tied to the main dwelling.
4.0 Parish Council Representations:
4.1 Hormead Parish Council object to the planning application on the grounds of ‘development by stealth, being an upgrading development to an earlier plan’.
5.0 Other Representations:
5.1 The application has been advertised by way of press notice, site notice and neighbour notification.
5.2 No letters of representation have been received. Page 202 3/13/1003/FP
6.0 Policy:
6.1 The relevant ‘saved’ Local Plan policies in this application include the following:
GBC3 Appropriate Development in the Rural Area Beyond the Green Belt ENV1 Design and Environmental Quality ENV5 Extensions to Dwellings ENV6 Extensions to Dwellings – Criteria ENV8 Residential Annexes TR7 Car Parking – Standards
6.2 The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) is also a material consideration in the determination of the application.
7.0 Considerations:
7.1 The determining issues in this case relate to Local Plan policy regarding the principle of development; the appropriateness of the residential annexe ; the impact of the proposed development on the character of the area and setting of the listed building and parking issues.
Principle of development
7.2 The application site is situated within the Rural Area Beyond the Green Belt, wherein permission will be given for limited alterations to dwellings. The proposed development involves a conversion of an existing building to an annex and there is therefore no increase in the floor space of the dwelling. As such, the proposed development is considered to represent a limited alteration to the existing dwelling, in accordance with policy GBC3 of the Local Plan.
Residential annexes
7.4 With regards to the conversion and extension of the building to provide a residential annexe, Policy ENV8 permits the conversion of an existing outbuilding to a residential annexe where the outbuilding is of a design and structure in keeping with the existing dwelling and locality; the size of the outbuilding is compatible with the requirements of the annexe; the outbuilding is appropriately located in relation to the main dwelling; and sufficient space to park vehicles for both parts of the dwelling is available and appropriately located within the curtilage of the site.
7.5 Officers consider that the annexe proposal in this application is sited in Page 203 3/13/1003/FP
an appropriate location in relation to the main dwelling and would therefore be capable of being used as an integral part of the use of main dwelling on the site. The size of the building to be converted is not significant (35-square metres) and Officers consider the proposed level of accommodation to be appropriate for an annex use which, from the information submitted by the applicant is for an elderly relative. Taking this into account and with regard to the relationship between the building with the dwellinghouse, Officers are of the opinion that the annexe will be used as an integral part of the main dwelling.
7.7 The sharing of the garden area, parking, access and the siting of the annexe with the dwelling, ensures that a good relationship is maintained between the dwelling and the annexe. Officers consider that the use of the annexe would remain dependent upon the main dwelling and a condition to require the use to be ancillary to the existing residential unit would be sufficient to control its use and prevent the annexe being used as an independent unit.
7.8 Policy ENV8 expects there to be sufficient parking for both the existing dwelling and the annexe within the site. There is a significant front driveway space that can accommodate a number of vehicles; Officers are therefore satisfied that there is sufficient provision for parking.
7.9 The comments from the Parish Council are noted – they raise concern with regards to ‘development by stealth’. Whilst Officers are not entirely clear on the exact concerns of the Parish Council, having regard to the above considerations. It is evident that the proposal accords with the relevant Local Plan policies and there is therefore no objection in principle to the re-use of the outbuilding as an annex.
Character and appearance
7.10 In terms of the appearance of the development, the alterations proposed to the building include internal alterations and the provision of some additional openings. The building is well set back from the road frontage and is not visible from any public vantage point. The Conservation Officer comments that the proposed alterations will not impact on the setting of the listed building. As such, Officers are of the opinion that the proposed building is of an appropriate design and structure in keeping with the existing dwelling and locality and that there will be no significant harm to the character and appearance of the site or setting of the listed building.
Page 204 3/13/1003/FP
Neighbouring Amenity
7.11 The building is located an appropriate distance from neighbouring properties such that there will be no significant impact on neighbour amenity.
8.0 Conclusion:
8.1 The proposed use of an existing outbuilding as an annex would not conflict with policy ENV8 of the Local Plan and will not result in significant harm to the character or appearance of the dwelling, its surroundings or the setting of the listed building. The building is located at an appropriate distance from the existing dwelling and neighbouring dwellings, with ample parking and no significant impact on highways safety or access. Officers therefore recommend that planning permission is granted subject to the conditions at the head of this report.
Page 205 This page is intentionally left blank
Page 206 Millview Bungalow
The Leys
Lilac Cottage Bradbury
Lavender Cottage
SITE
White House
Clock House
White House Lodge Ley Court
888 668688 666 333 113133 Gardeners Cottage 1 1 1
BBB BBB
North End Farm
8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
BBB BBB BBB
Ashdown Hare Street House House
Small Chapel Barn
The Granary The Close Hare Street Lych Cottage Gate The Beehive 888 (PH) BBB 1 11000333888 Heatherdown
B B B Tel Ex
B B B
B B B
1 1 1
1 1 1 1 1 1 Pavilion 3 3 3
3 3 3
3 3 3
6 6 6
6 6 6
6 6 6
8 8 8 The 8 8 8 8 8 8 Willows Barnside
Layston
1 House
4
Bellhouse 2
Yard 3
Highfields Kennels 1 1 2 s Cottage This copy has been produced specifically for Map Control Scheme purposes only. No further copies may be made Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown Copyright and may lead to prosecution or civil proceedings Reproduced from the Ordnance Survey map data with the permission of the controller of Her Majesty's Stationery Office Crown Copyright 2009 East Herts Council. LA Ref: 100018528 (
East Herts Council Address: White House Lodge, Hare Street, Buntingford, SG9 0DX Wallfields Reference: 3/13/1003/FP Pegs Lane Hertford Scale: 1:2500 SG13 8EQ O.S Sheet: TL3930 Tel: 01279 655261 Date of Print: 24 July 2013 Page 207 This page is intentionally left blank
Page 208 Agenda Item 5l 5L 3/13/1078/FP – Part two storey, part single storey rear extension following demolition of existing conservatory at 24, Pinelands, Bishop’s Stortford for Mr M Kingsland
Date of Receipt: 10.06.2013 Type: Full – (Other)
Parish: BISHOP’S STORTFORD
Ward: BISHOP’S STORTFORD – MEADS
RECOMMENDATION:
That planning permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:
1. Three Year Time Limit (1T12)
2. Approved Plans (2E10) (Location Plan, 01, 02, 03, 04, 05)
3. Matching Materials (2E13)
Directives:
1. Other Legislation (01OL)
2. Ground Water Protection Zone (28GP)
Summary of Reasons for Decision
East Herts Council has considered the applicant’s proposal in a positive and proactive manner with regard to the policies of the Development Plan (Minerals Local Plan, Waste Core Strategy and Development Management Policies DPD 2012 and the ’saved’ policies of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007; the National Planning Policy Framework and in accordance with the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2012 (as amended). The balance of the considerations having regard to those policies is that permission should be granted.
(107813FP.FM)
1.0 Background:
1.1 The application site is shown on the attached OS extract. No24 Pinelands is a 2 storey semi-detached property, sited at the end of a small cul-de-sac and to the north of the centre of Bishop’s Stortford. The site lies within the built up area, wherein there is no objection in principle to development. Page 209 3/13/1078/FP
1.2 The application proposes the erection of a part single storey, part 2 storey rear extension following the demolition of the existing rear conservatory that appears to have been constructed under permitted development. The extension would project 4.6 metres beyond the rear wall of the original dwelling. The ground floor element of the extension would have a width of 5.1 metres and the first floor element would be smaller, with a width of almost 3.7 metres. It would retain a set down from the roof ridge line of the main dwellinghouse of 1.7 metres and at first floor would comprise a bedroom.
2.0 Site History:
2.1 There is no planning history to the site but it is important to note that planning permission was granted in 2005 under LPA reference 3/05/2412/FP at the adjoining property for a similar part 2 storey, part single storey rear extension that has been constructed.
3.0 Consultation Responses:
3.1 Affinity Water comment that the site is located within the groundwater Source Protection Zone, of Causeway Pumping Station. Therefore the construction works and operation of the proposed development should be done in accordance with the relevant British Standards and Best Management Practices.
4.0 Town Council Representations:
4.1 Bishop’s Stortford Town Council raise no objection to the proposal.
5.0 Other Representations:
5.1 The application has been advertised by way of site notice and neighbour notification. No letters of representation have been received.
6.0 Policy:
6.1 The relevant ‘saved’ Local Plan policies in this application include the following:
ENV1 Design and Environmental Quality ENV5 Extensions to Dwellings ENV6 Extensions to Dwellings - Criteria
6.2 In addition, national planning policy as set out in the National Planning Policy Framework is relevant. Page 210 3/13/1078/FP
7.0 Considerations:
7.1 The application site is located within the built up area of Bishop’s Stortford wherein, in principle, there is no objection to development. Proposed extensions to dwellings will be assessed with regard to Policies ENV1, ENV5 and ENV6 of the Local Plan, the former policy requires that development meets a high standard of design and layout. Policy ENV5 states that permission will be granted for extensions provided that the character, appearance and amenities of the dwelling and any adjoining dwellings would not be substantially affected to their detriment. Policy ENV6 states that extensions should be to a design and choice of materials either matching or complementary to the original building.
7.2 The proposed part single storey, part two storey rear extension would be modest in size and scale in relation to the existing dwelling, and taking into account that the roof of the extension would be set down from the main roof ridge line of the existing dwellinghouse it is Officers opinion that the extension would appear proportionate and subservient to the main dwelling. The design and form of the proposed extension, with a pitched roof to match that of the existing dwellinghouse would also be appropriate for the character and appearance of the existing dwelling.
7.3 Taking into account the above considerations, the proposed development is therefore considered to be of a size, scale, siting and design such that it is in keeping with the character and appearance of the existing building and the locality, in accordance with policy ENV1 of the Local Plan. It is considered that the recommended condition requiring matching materials is necessary in this case, to ensure that the proposed development will assimilate successfully with the existing building.
Impact upon neighbour amenity
7.4 Turning to neighbour amenity, Officers have assessed the impact that the proposed development would have upon the amenities of neighbouring occupiers and in particular in respect of their privacy, daylight, outlook and whether the proposal would have an overbearing impact. Turning firstly to the adjoining property, No26 Pinelands, Officers acknowledge that the 2 storey extension may reduce the light received by No26’s rear window that is sited closest to the shared boundary. However, taking into account that the proposed extension at first floor level would retain 1.7 metres to the shared boundary and its modest height, I do not consider that the proposed extension would Page 211 3/13/1078/FP
create an unacceptable impact upon neighbouring amenity from loss of light, outlook or similar
7.5 In respect of the impact upon the immediate neighbouring property to the south No22 Pinelands, having regard to the distance of almost 2 metres the flank wall of the proposed extension would retain to the flank wall of No22, that the proposed extension does not include any windows in the flank elevation and the existing 2 storey rear extension that has been constructed at No22, I do not consider that the proposed extension would create an unacceptable impact upon this neighbours amenity from loss of light, outlook or similar
8.0 Conclusion:
8.1 Taking into account the modest proportions of the proposed development, and for the reasons outlined above, it is recommended that planning permission be granted subject to the conditions referred to at the head of this report.
Page 212 W W W
W W W
W W W
H H H
H H H
H H H
I I I
I I I
IT IT IT T T T T T T 12 E E E
E E E
E E E
H H H
H H H
H H H
A A A
A A A
A A A
L L L
L L L
L L L
L L L
L L L
L L L
R R R R R R
R R R
O O O 1 O O O O O O 4 a
A A A
A A A
A A A
D D D D D D EEE D D D EEE
NNN
AAANNN 0 L LLAAA 1 LLL L LL LLLLL AAALLL AAA HHH EEEHHH IITITTEEE IITITT HHH WWWHHH 1 WWW 4
Whitehall Leys SITE
GGG
GGGRRR
1 RRRAAA 1 AAANNN NNNGGG
EEE 5
27
6
2 1 13
1 5 2
t r
u 4 o
2
4 o C 1 t
1 e r
e 1 r F
PPP PPPIII IININN EEE LLL AAA NNN DDD
SSS
2
6
5
6 6
8
6
4 7
6 6
b 1
a
1
2
6
1 4
0 1
1a 11 21 The Lodge 33
LLLIININDDSSSEEEYYY
DDSSSEEEYYY R ROOAADD 2
1 2
1 2
B B B 4
B B B
B B B
A A A
A A A
A A A
R R
R 1
R R
R 38
R R R
6
R R R 3
R R R
R R R This copy has been produced specifically for Map Control Scheme purposes only. No further copies may be made Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown Copyright and may lead to prosecution or civil proceedings Reproduced from the Ordnance Survey map data with the permission of the controller of Her Majesty's Stationery Office Crown Copyright 2009 East Herts Council. LA Ref: 100018528 (
East Herts Council Address: 24, Pinelands, Bishops Stortford, Hertfordshire, CM23 2TE Wallfields Reference: 3/13/1078/FP Pegs Lane Hertford Scale: 1:1250 SG13 8EQ O.S Sheet: TL4822SE Tel: 01279 655261 Date of Print: 24 July 2013 Page 213 This page is intentionally left blank
Page 214 Agenda Item 6
6. EAST HERTFORDSHIRE DISTRICT COUNCIL DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE – 14 AUGUST 2013 ITEMS FOR REPORT AND NOTING
(A)APPEALS Director of Neighbourhood Services (Development Management)
Application 3/12/0814/FP number: Recommendation: Permission refuse Level of Decision: Delegated – 12 July 2012 Site: Dhoon, Epping Green, Hertford, Hertfordshire, SG13 8NB Appellant: Mrs S Baker Prop. Use of the ground floor for the purposes of childcare on Development: domestic premises for up to 32 children Appeal Decision Allowed
Application 3/12/1805/FP number: Recommendation: Permission grant and conditions Level of Decision: Committee – 09 January 2013 Site: Dhoon, Epping Green, Hertford, Hertfordshire, SG13 8NB Appellant: Samantha Baker Prop. Use of part of ground floor for the purposes of childcare Development: on a domestic premises for up to 20 children Appeal Decision Allowed
Application 3/12/1991/FP number: Recommendation: Permission refuse Level of Decision: Delegated – 23 January 2013 Site: 19, Orchard Road, Tewin, Welwyn, Hertfordshire, AL6 0HG Appellant: Mr and Mrs S Woods Prop. Two storey extension and detached garage Development: Appeal Decision Dismissed
Page 215
Application 3/12/1443/FP number: Recommendation: Permission refuse Level of Decision: Delegated – 23 January 2013 Site: 71, Dunmow Road, Bishops Stortford, Hertfordshire, CM23 5HF Appellant: Mrs M Cundall Prop. Proposed vehicular crossover, dropped kerb and Development: hardstanding. Appeal Decision Dismissed
Application 3/12/1348/LB number: Recommendation: Listed building consent refuse Level of Decision: Delegated – 03 October 2012 Site: 8, 10 and 12, Railway Street, Hertford, Herts, SG14 1BG Appellant: Union Realty Ltd. Prop. Internal alterations to the ground floor to partially remove Development: the front chimney breasts to Nos. 10 and 12 Railway Street, cut back the ground floor chimney breast to No. 8 and widen openings between the shop units. Appeal Decision Allowed
Application 3/12/1395/FP number: Recommendation: Permission refuse Level of Decision: Committee – 05 December 2012 Site: Kick And Dicky, Wellpond Green, Standon, Ware, Hertfordshire, SG11 1NL Appellant: Mr F Aspin Prop. Change of use of public house to 1 no. dwelling Development: Appeal Decision Allowed
Application 3/12/1130/FP number: Recommendation: Permission refuse Level of Decision: Committee – 12 September 2012 Site: Former Biss Vehicles Old Site, London Road, Spellbrook, Bishops Stortford, Herts, CM23 4AU Appellant: Mr and Mrs J Smeeth Prop. Erection of 1 No. three bedroom dwelling and garage Development: Appeal Decision Allowed
Page 216
Background Papers Correspondence at Essential Reference Paper ‘A’.
Contact Officers Kevin Steptoe, Head of Planning and Building Control – Extn: 1407. Alison Young, Development Manager – Extn: 1553.
Page 217
This page is intentionally left blank
Page 218 Page 219 Page 220 Page 221 Page 222 Page 223 Page 224 Page 225 Page 226 Page 227 Page 228 Page 229 Page 230 Page 231 Page 232 Page 233 Page 234 Page 235 Page 236 Page 237 Page 238 Page 239 Page 240 Page 241 Page 242 Page 243 Page 244 6(B) PLANNING APPEALS LODGED Director of Neighbourhood Services (Development Management)
Application Description Decision Appeal Start Appeal No: Location Date Mode 3/12/2048/FP Demolition of Refused 18 July 2013 Written existing two garage Evidence blocks and erection Delegated of 2no. 2-bedroom houses together with private amenity space and car parking. Land to the west of, Trinity Close, Bishop's Stortford, Herts, CM23 3TJ
3/13/0120/LB Single storey oak- Refused 15 July 2013 Written framed garden Evidence room extension Delegated The Cat and Fiddle, Braughing, Ware, SG11 2QX
3/13/0170/FP First floor rear Refused 10 July 2013 Written extension and Evidence alterations to Delegated existing dwelling including conversion of one garage to playroom , alterations to roof , insertion of roof lights and changes to fenestration. 21, Bishops Road, Tewin Wood, Tewin, Welwyn, Hertfordshire, AL6 0NR
Page 245 3/13/0171/FP Single storey rear Refused 10 July 2013 Written extension and Evidence alterations to Delegated existing dwelling including conversion of one garage to playroom ,alterations to roof, insertion of rooflights and changes to fenestration 21, Bishops Road, Tewin Wood, Tewin, Welwyn, Hertfordshire, AL6 0NR 3/13/0385/FP First floor rear Refused 30 July 2013 Written extension and front Evidence porch extension Delegated 7, Church Walk, Sawbridgeworth, Hertfordshire, CM21 9BJ 3/13/0428/FP Demolition of Refused 16 July 2013 Informal existing and Hearing erection of a Delegated replacement dwelling. 35, Burnham Green Road, Burnham Green, Welwyn, Herts, AL6 0NL 3/13/0533/AD Freestanding signs Refused 30 July 2013 Written Junction, Evidence Southmill Delegated Road/London Road, Bishop's Stortford, Herts 3/13/0534/AD Freestanding signs Refused 29 July 2013 Written Junction, Evidence Southmill Delegated Road/London Road, Bishop's Stortford, Herts
Page 246 3/13/0581/FP Demolition of single Refused 24 July 2013 Written storey extensions to Evidence enable erection of Delegated detached two bedroom dwelling; alterations to host dwelling and construction of detached single garage, associated parking and new crossover 84, High Wych Road, Sawbridgeworth, Herts, CM21 0HQ 3/13/0717/FP Erection of six Refused 26 July 2013 Written stables and Evidence associated feed Delegated and bedding store Land south of, West End Road, Wormley West End, Broxbourne, Herts
NOTE: This report shows only appeals lodged since the last Development Management Committee agenda deadline.
Background Papers None.
Contact Officers Kevin Steptoe, Head of Planning and Building Control, Extn: 1407. Alison Young, Development Manager, Extn: 1553.
Page 247 This page is intentionally left blank
Page 248 Planning Appeals: Inquiry and Informal Hearing Dates
Public Inquiries:
Application Location Proposal Date Number 3/12/1657/FP North of Hare Street Residential 10–20 December 2013 Road, Buntingford – development 160 units 3/13/0118/OP South of Hare Residential Street Road, development Buntingford – 100 units (approx)
Informal Hearings:
3/12/2090/FP Denzils Barn, Lodge Change of use 4 September 2013 Farm, Epping Green to residential
Enforcement Appeals (where the matter does not relate to an associated planning or similar application which are set out above): None.
Page 249 This page is intentionally left blank
Page 250 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL
Major, Minor and Other Planning Applications
Cumulative Performance for May 2013 (calculated from April 2013) Apr-13 May-13 Jun-13 Jul-13 Aug-13 Sep-13 Oct-13 Nov-13 Dec-13 Jan-14 Feb-14 Mar-14 Total Applications 6D No. ITEM AGENDA Received 198 404 617 853
Targets for National Local Targets (set Percentage achieved Performance by against Local and (set by East Government)
National Targets Apr-13 May-13 Jun-13 Jul-13 Aug-13 Sep-13 Oct-13 Nov-13 Dec-13 Jan-14 Feb-14 Mar-14 Herts)
Major % 0% 0% 0% 9% Major % 60% 60%
Minor % 85% 77% 80% 82% Minor % 80% 65%
Other % 94% 93% 92% 92% Other % 90% 80% #####
Appeals Apr-13 Jun-13 Jul-13 Aug-13 Sep-13 Oct-13 Nov-13 Dec-13 Jan-14 Feb-14 Mar-14 Total number of appeal decisions (Monthy) 4 5 7 8 Number Allowed against our refusal (Monthly) 2 1 3 5
Total number of appeal decisions
Page 251 (Cumulative) 4 9 16 24 Number Allowed against our refusal (Cumulative) 2 3 6 11 This page is intentionally left blank
Page 252