SJK Planning Ongar, Essex, CM5 9EQ Chartered Town Planners Tel 01277 362489

Home , Chipping Ongar, Epping Forest District, Stanford Rivers

Byways, Landview Gardens, SJK Planning Ongar, Essex, CM5 9EQ Chartered Town Planners Tel 01277 362489 www.sjkplanning.co.uk

APPEAL BY MR AND MRS BIXBY AGAINST THE REFUSAL OF PLANNING PERMISSION BY EPPING FOREST DISTRICT COUNCIL FOR CONSTRUCTION OF 1 NEW DWELLING AT END HOUSE, 8, HILL CREST ROAD, TOOT HILL ONGAR, ESSEX, CM5 9SH

APPEAL STATEMENT

OUR REF – 1899 LPA REF – EPF/1943/17 2

Contents Page

1 Introduction 3

2 The Site and Surroundings 5

3 The Planning History 6

4 The Planning Application 12

5 Relevant Planning Policies 13

6 The Planning Considerations 15

7 Conclusion 18

Appendix 1 - Photographs of the site

1.0 Introduction

1.1 This appeal is against the decision of Epping Forest District Council to refuse planning permission for the construction of 1 new dwelling on land adjacent to End House, 8, Hill Crest Road, Toot Hill, Ongar, Essex, CM5 9SH. .

1.2 End House is a detached 4 bedroom detached house on a large plot extending to some 0.9 hectare at the north eastern end of the road. Cumley Road has a total of 7 dwellings, and joins Epping Road some 50 m to the south. Both Hill Crest Road and Cumley Road are privately owned.

The proposed bungalow would be bounded by End House, No.5 Cumley Road, and Willows End, with access direct onto Cumley Road.

1.3 The application proposes a bungalow in line with End House but accessed by way of the adjoining road. It is within the curtilage of End House but has not historically formed part of its immediate garden area. The proposed site would be bounded by End House, No.5 Cumley Road, and Willows End.

1.4 In assessing the proposal the planning officers looked at the principle of development in the context of guidance in the National Planning Policy Framework. It was agreed that the bungalow would have a “rough alignment with the northern side of existing house fronting Hill Crest Road”, but the planning officer was not satisfied that the gardens of the three adjoining houses should constitute previously developed land. There was also concern that the bungalow would be too close to the neighbouring house at No. 5 Cumley Road.

1.5 Our grounds of appeal are that first, that Toot Hill has been accepted as a suitable and sustainable location for small infill development, having regard also for the fact that that the Council can currently only demonstrate a 1.35 year supply of land for housing purposes. Due to this it has been shown in several recent appeal decisions, both within and outside of the district, that such a lack of a demonstrable five year supply of housing weighs in favour of granting planning permission.

1.6 Secondly, it is clear that the site is within the village. Thirdly, given the location of the site, level with End House, and having developed land on three sides, it does constitute an infill site. Recent decisions in Toot Hill and elsewhere have accepted adjoining garden land as enclosing an infill site. Fourthly, definitions of what can constitute an infill site do not require that they have a frontage to one of the main roads through a village. The site will have direct access onto Cumley Road, at a distance of only 100 metres from its junction with Epping Road.

1.7 In setting out the grounds of appeal in detail, this statement describes the appeal site and the surrounding area. It then looks at the planning history of the site, and other recent planning decisions in the village. It then describes the proposals and sets out the relevant planning policies and planning considerations.

2.0 The Site and Surroundings

2.1 The site is rectangular in shape, measuring 32 metres by 25 metres, extending to an area of 800 square metres. Although forming part of the curtilage to End House, it has an access directly onto Cumley Road. It is enclosed by existing fences on the south and east side, and new fence would enclose it on the north side.

2.2 It has historically formed part of the curtilage to End House, but not specifically included as part of its cultivated garden.

2.3 Further to the north is an open area of ground enclosed by a mature hedge. Beyond which is open farmland.

2.4 Cumley Road and Hillcrest Road are both private roads, and comprise a mixture of bungalows, houses, and chalet bungalows. It is thought that the two roads were originally envisaged to be linked together by a loop at the northern end. Most of the houses were built prior to the Second World War and it is likely that this northern part of the site was not developed due to the interruption of the Second World War, and also after the Second World War by the lack of building materials.

2.5 Toot Hill is located 2.3 miles (4 km) south-west of Chipping Ongar and 3.5 miles (6 km) east of Epping. The nature of the settlement is that is mostly linear along Epping Road, School Road, and Toot Hill Road. The village is part of the Stanford Rivers Parish, which also encompasses the villages of Little End, Clatterford End, and Stanford Rivers. The Parish has a population 817.

2.6 The residents of Toot Hill village have access to a range of services and facilities including a bus service, a thriving village hall with many clubs and societies, a pub and a golf club. Any concerns about the village being relatively remote should be outweighed by the drastic shortage of housing land to meet a five years’ housing supply 6 and the precedent of the various similar planning permissions for small scale housing schemes granted locally within the last 5 years.

3.0 The Planning History

3.1 This section sets out the planning history of the site. It also looks at other application over the last three years, where planning permission has been granted for infill development within the village.

1) EPF/1766/12 End House 8 Hill Crest Road Stanford Rivers Ongar Essex CM5 9SH

3.2 This application proposed the removal of an existing garage and carport, and erection of new single and two storey side extensions, veranda and decking. It included permission for a sun lounge on the northern side of the dwelling, measuring 5.7 metres by 3.5 metres.

The approved plan

2) EPF/0368/13 - End House 8 Hill Crest Road Stanford Rivers Ongar Essex CM5 9SH

3.3 A Proposed cart shed and store was granted permission on 17th April 2013. 7

The approved plan

3) EPF/1046/17 Land off Cumley Road Toot Hill Stanford Rivers Ongar Essex CM5 9SH.

3.4 An application for the construction of two new dwellings was refused Planning Permission on 6th June 2017, on the grounds of inappropriate development in the Green Belt, inadequate provision for the retention of existing landscape features, and loss of outlook for adjoining occupiers.

The application proposed two dwellings accessed from Cumley Road, lining up with the side boundary to Willow’s End. 8

3.5 It is also relevant to look at some of the recent planning permissions for infill plots in the village. These are:-

1) EPF/2936/14 Land adjacent to Longacre Cottage School Road Stanford Rivers Ongar Essex CM5 9PU

3.6 Outline planning application for proposed new 4 bed dwelling with some matters reserved. Approved 8th April 2015. The plot was described as clearly lying within the south east part of the Toot Hill village envelope, and accordingly accepted as meeting the requirements of Para 89 of the NPPF and hence an appropriate development.

Land adjacent to Longacre Cottage.

2) EPF/2207/15 Mill Place Mill Lane Toot Hill Essex CM5 9SF

3.7 Sub-division of plot and erection of a three-bedroomed bungalow with new access off Mill Lane. Approved 26 November 2015. The officer’s report explained that although located in the Green Belt “this is an infill plot within a village envelope and consequently 9 a new dwelling is considered acceptable. For this reason, and those outlined above, it is recommended that planning permission be granted”.

3) EPF/1780/16 Land to south side of Steers Farm School Road Toot Hill Ongar Essex CM5 9SD

3.8 Proposed new infill detached 4 bedroom house with detached carport. Approved 13th October 2016. This site fronts onto School Road. It has Steers Farm to the north, and open land to the south and east.

Site adjacent to Steers Farm

3.9 The southern boundary was described in a report as follows:-

“A large detached dwelling house with a detached garage within substantial grounds defines the common boundary to the south.”

4) EPF/3350/17 Land Between Doe's Farm and 60 Epping Road Epping Road Stanford Rivers Ongar Essex CM5 9SQ

3.10 This site is the subject of a current planning application, proposing the erection of two detached dwellings, associated garages and landscaping. 10

Land subject of current application, close to the appeal site. The informal view of planning officers is that it does form a small infill plot.

3.11 The supporting information includes a copy of pre-application advice. With regard to the principle of development it reads:-

“Whilst the built up enclave of Toot Hill is somewhat limited in terms of services and may not be defined as a ‘village’ in the strictest terms there have been a number of appeal decisions with regards to such infills, which have included one at Rosedale, Hornbeam Lane, Sewardstonebury (Ref: EPF/0288/13). Nonetheless the Planning Inspector concluded that “the site, whilst towards the periphery of the built-up area, is within the village”. Similarly, an appeal decision for an infill development in Spellbrook, Herts was considered acceptable since the Planning Inspector stated that “given the almost continuous pattern of development along the main road, it is reasonable to conclude that the ribbon of development and, consequently, the appeal site, should be regarded as within the village”. More importantly however planning permission has recently been granted for the replacement of a mobile home and associated development with a bungalow at Fairways, Wellington Hill (EPF/1298/15). Despite being recommended for refusal by Planning Officers consent 11

was granted at Committee with the main justification being that the proposal was considered to constitute 'limited infilling within a village'.

3.12 With regards to what can be defined as infilling and the character of the site, the advice reads as follows:-

“The exception to inappropriate development in the Green Belt, as laid out within the NPPF, does not specify that such infilling must be between residential properties, and in fact no definition is given as to what development constitutes 'limited infilling' (i.e. this would not purely relate to new housing). As such the sheer presence of existing dwelling to the east, along with the curtilage of a residential property to the west, would ensure that the site constitutes an 'infill plot'.”

Aerial Photograph showing the location of infill plots in Toot Hill

Location of Appeal Site circled orange. Locations of recently granted infill plots also circled. Mill Lane (EPF/2207/15), Long Acre Cottage (EPF/2936/14), and Steers Farm (EPF/1780/16). Site circled yellow is the subject a current planning application. Pre-application advice has been that it should constitute an infill site. It is enclosed by gardens on two sides and open land to the north. 12

4.0 The Planning Application

4.1 The application proposed the erection of an “H” shaped three bedroom bungalow. It would measure 14 metres by 13.5 metres (maximum dimensions) and be 5.8 metres to the ridge. It would be located towards the southern boundary of the plot, set back silghtly from the other 3 dwellings on the east side of Cumley Road. It would be 30 metres from End House, 7 metres from No. 5 Cumley Road, and 20 metres from Willows End.

4.2 The bungalow would be located such that it links development in Cumley Road with Hillcrest Road. The northern limit of its boundary would line up with the northern boundary to End House.

4.3 The bungalow has been designed to be low in appearance and traditional in style, and to be in keeping with the bungalows in Cumley Road. Cumley Road has a mixture of bungalows and two storey dwellings without any particular style. The proposed bungalow would therefore be in keeping with the layout of Cumley Road and Hillcrest Road.

The proposed bungalow would have a traditional appearance.

4.4 The proposed dwelling is similar in size to Willows End, which is on the opposite side of the road from Plot 1, and being single storey there will be no overlooking issues to Willows End or End House.

4.5 The bungalow has two car spaces proposed and good space to benefit from landscaping. All boundaries to the plots will be hedged with natural species such as hawthorn and blackthorn, in keeping with the rural location and setting of the two plot.

5.0 Relevant Planning Policies

5.1 This section looks at both national and local planning policies. It is important to mention that local policies are in the process of being reviewed in order that they follow the new government guidance. An emerging local plan is going through the consultation process.

National Policy

5.2 The National Planning Policy Framework says that:-

“This is a key part of our reforms to make the planning system less complex and more accessible, and to promote sustainable growth”

And that:-

“Development that is sustainable should go ahead, without delay - a presumption in favour of sustainable development that is the basis for every plan, and every decision. This framework sets out clearly what could make a proposed plan or development unsustainable.

In order to fulfil its purpose of helping achieve sustainable development, planning must not simply be about scrutiny. Planning must be a creative exercise in finding ways to enhance and improve the places in which we live our lives.”

5.3 The framework requires that development should be of good design and appropriately located, stating that:- 14

“The Government attaches great importance to the design of the built environment. Good design is indivisible from good planning and should contribute positively to making places better for people. The Government’s objective for the planning system is to promote good design that ensures attractive, usable and durable places. This is a key element in achieving sustainable development.”

5.4 In respect of the Green Belt the Framework states that:-

“The fundamental aim of Green Belt policy is to prevent urban sprawl by keeping land permanently open; the essential characteristics of Green Belts are their openness and their permanence.”

5.5 Paragraph 89 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) states that a local planning authority should regard the construction of new buildings as inappropriate in Green Belt. One of the exceptions to this is described as:-

“limited infilling or the partial or complete redevelopment of previously developed sites (brownfield land), whether redundant or in continuing use (excluding temporary buildings), which would not have a greater impact on the openness of the Green Belt and the purpose of including land within it than the existing development.”

Local Policy

5.6 The policies in the Epping Forest Local Plan Alterations (1998/2006) broadly reflect the national guidance to restrict development in the Green Belt. Because of the age of the local plan, the NPPF’s definition of what constitutes “not inappropriate” development in the Green Belt now carries significant weight. This has been reflected in many local decisions taken in Epping Forest District since the NPPF assumed its full weight in March 2013.

5.7 Policy DBE1 of the Local Plan requires that new buildings respect their setting in terms of scale, proportion, siting, massing, height, orientation, roof-line and detailing; are of a size and position such that they adopt a significance in the street scene which is appropriate to their use or function; and only employ external materials which are sympathetic in colour and texture to the vernacular range of materials.

5.8 Policy DBE2 states that planning permission will not be granted for new buildings which have a detrimental effect upon existing neighbouring or surrounding properties in either amenity or functional terms.

5.9 The Council is currently in the process of preparing a new Local Plan and has recently published a Submission Draft for consultation. Policy DM4 of the Submission Draft Local Plan (December 2017) is consistent with the NPPF as it says “limited infilling in smaller settlements” is not inappropriate development in the Green Belt.

5.10 The new Local Plan will identify new sites for residential development. The latest figures however reveal that the Council can currently only demonstrate a 1.35 year supply of land for housing purposes. Due to this it has been shown in several recent appeal decisions, both within and outside of the district that such a lack of a demonstrable five year supply of housing, weighs in favour of granting planning permission. This however still has to be weighed against other material planning considerations.

6.0 The Planning Considerations

6.1 This section sets out what are considered to be the main planning considerations. They are dealt with under the headings of principle of development, and residential amenity, as follows:-

The principle of development

6.2 The site is in the Green Belt, where residential development is normally regarded as inappropriate. However the fourth bullet point in paragraph 89 of the NPPF defines “limited infilling in villages” as not inappropriate development.

6.3 In deciding whether this proposal should benefit from NPPF paragraph 89 the first question to ask is whether the site is in a village.

6.4 Toot Hill is obviously a village, and was accepted as such for planning purposes when planning permission was granted October 2016 for a village infill proposal on a site south of Steers Farm in School Road, Toot Hill (EPF/1780/16). The application site is at the opposite (western end) of the village. The sign indicating that you are entering the built up area of Toot Hill village is just to the west of Does Farm, immediately to the south west of the site, and this is where the 30 mph speed limit starts. Does Farm consists of a group of about 6 or 7 buildings. After the narrow (40m gap) of the application site are road frontage dwellings at 58 & 60 Epping Road; and further dwellings to the rear of these at The Meadows, Pyrgo, Elm Cottage and Willows End, all served from Cumley Road. Opposite the application site is Freemans Farm.

6.5 Toot Hill is similar to other settlements in the District which have been accepted as villages, for the purposes of applying paragraph 89 of the NPPF, for example: -

ellington Hill, High Beech (planning permission EPF/3254/16) Sewardstonebury (EPF/0288/13 and appeal decision APP/J1535/A/13/2198529) Bumbles Green (planning permission EPF/1788/15).

6.6 For the purposes of applying paragraph 89 the site is clearly therefore within a village.

6.7 In considering the principle of development the next question is whether the site can be regarded as forming an infill. Three keys points are relevant. First the site has dwellings and garden land on three sides. To End House to the east, to No.5 Cumley Road to the south and with Willows End to the west. Secondly, the northern boundary of the appeal site lines up with the northern boundary of End House. Thirdly, the land to the northern of the site is open in character but has always been part of the large domestic curtilage, rather than open countryside.

6.8 We have looked at the planning permission for other infill development in Toot Hill and have applied the same criteria. Contrary to the officer report in this case, garden land on two sides of potential infill plot, has been accepted as a firm boundary.

6.9 The site the subject of this appeal appears to be different from the other cases, in only one respect. It does not have a frontage to part of one of the village’s through roads, such as School Road or Epping Road. The plot does however have an immediate access onto Cumley Road, and this minor distinction should not prevent it from being regarded as infill.

6.10 It is also relevant to consider whether Toot Hill is a sustainable location for such development, whilst having regard also for the shortage of housing supply. The residents of Toot Hill village have access to a range of services and facilities including a bus service, a thriving village hall with many clubs and societies, a pub and a golf club. The village is 2.3 miles (4 km) south-west of Chipping Ongar and 3.5 miles (6 km) east of Epping. However any concerns about the village being relatively remote should be outweighed by the drastic shortage of housing land to meet a five years’ housing supply and the precedent of the various similar planning permissions for small scale housing schemes granted locally within the last 5 years.

6.11 We therefore consider that the principle of the proposed development accords with the NPPF, and the emerging local plan policy.

Residential amenity

6.12 The key to assessing whether there would be any excessive impact on neighbours’ amenities rests on the relationship of the proposed dwelling with the adjoining house at No. 5 Cumley Road. The proposed bungalow would be sited such that it would have the same relationship to its neighbours as the other houses along the road, set off the boundary by over 1 metre. There would not be any loss of light to neighbouring occupiers, overbearing impact, or overlooking. Any minor loss of outlook from the garden should not be sufficiently harmful to warrant a refusal of planning permission. The application therefore complies with policies DBE1 and DBE2 of the Local Plan.

7.0 Conclusion

7.1 The proposals have been formulated with regard to the principles of good planning and design. This appeal statement has carefully described the location and the character of the site. With reference to national guidance, and similar infill sites within the village, it has been demonstrated that the site meets the requirements for infill development, in accordance with Paragraph 89 of the NPPF. The site would sit between and relate well to existing development. Importantly, it would not extend the village into the open countryside.

7.2 The proposed bungalow will not result in any material harm to the amenities of residents in the area.

7.3 The Inspector is therefore urged to support the appellant’s case and allow the appeal.

SJK Planning February 2018