The Application Site and Is Located to the East of Little Walden Road, on the North- Ern Side of the Built-Up Area of Saffron Walden

UTT/19/3068/DFO – (SAFFRON WALDEN)

(Major)

PROPOSAL: Reserved matters following UTT/16/2210/OP for 85 residential dwellings including all necessary infrastructure and landscaping. Details of appearance, landscaping, layout and scale.

LOCATION: Land East Of Little Walden Road Saffron Walden

APPLICANT: Abbey Developments

AGENT: CMYK

EXPIRY DATE: 17 March 2020

CASE OFFICER: Maria Shoesmith

1. NOTATION

1.1 Countryside; County Wildlife Site (part).

2. DESCRIPTION OF SITE

2.1 The application site and is located to the east of Little Walden Road, on the northern side of the built-up area of Saffron Walden. It comprises part of an agricultural field and covers approximately 4.47 hectares (11 acres). The irregular southern boundary of the site follows the extent of the existing residential development at St Marys View and Limefields whilst the western boundary extends along Little Walden Road (the B1052). The northern boundary is formed by a belt of woodland with open fields beyond. The eastern boundary is largely arbitrary and follows no natural boundary but has been drawn to coincide with the eastern boundary of the woodland and the extended hedge line from the Limefields Pits local nature reserve to the south.

2.2 The site is largely open and in agricultural use apart from the area adjacent to the existing residential development which contains an area of scrub with trees around its edges. The site has a frontage of some 160m along Little Walden Road. Approximately three quarters of this boundary is formed by a substantial hedgerow with an open area along the southern approach into the town.

2.3 The site slopes down from east to west by approximately 10m. There are trees within the southern part of the site which is subject to Tree Preservation Order. There is a hedge along the some of the boundary of Little Walden Road although part of this frontage is open as is much of the eastern boundary.

2.4 Little Walden Road is one of the main roads into the Town Centre of Saffron Walden that is 1.5km away.

3. PROPOSAL

3.1 The application is for the approval of reserved matters following a grant of outline planning permission via an appeal on 21 August 2017 (UTT/16/2210/OP). The outline permission included the approval of access, with the current application seeking the approval of appearance, landscaping, layout and scale.

3.2 A previous Reserved Matters application submitted UTT/18/2959/DFO was refused on 1 October 2019 for the following reasons;

1. The proposed layout fails to comply with the outline planning permission, in particular in relation to the amount of public open space which was persuasive in informing the Inspector's decision. The reduced public open space would have an adverse effect on the design of the scheme and the amenity of residents, in conflict with policies S7 and GEN2, GEN7, ENV3 and ENV8 of the Uttlesford Local Plan (adopted 2005) and the National Planning Policy Framework.

2. The application fails to demonstrate that the nationally described space standards in the Planning Practice Guidance would be met. This would have an adverse effect on the living conditions of residents, in conflict with Policy GEN2 of the Uttlesford Local Plan (adopted 2005), the emerging Uttlesford Local Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

3. The application fails to demonstrate that appropriate broadband provision and energy efficiency measures would be incorporated within the design of the proposed dwellings, in conflict with the National Planning Policy Framework and the emerging Uttlesford Local Plan.

This has since been allowed on appeal 12 May 2020.

3.3 This revised Reserved Matters application seeks to amend the scheme to address the reasons for refusal, whilst twin tracking the scheme with the appeal UTT/18/2959/DFO.

3.4 It is stated within the submitted Planning Statement that all the houses meet national space standards.

3.5 The Planning Inspector placed a condition upon the outline consent quantifying the amount of Green Space Infrastructure (including public open space). The green infrastructure is now stated to be the same as that on the Development Framework as approved and conditioned as part of the outline consent.

3.6 The provision of broadband infrastructure is a Building Regulation requirement which can be conditioned. And with regards to energy efficiency it is stated that there is already a condition on the outline permission which requires electric vehicle charging points and state that in any case this could also be conditioned.

3.7 The Proposed Development comprises the following key elements:

The residential area for up to 85 dwelling is stated will have a density of 34dph and covering a developable area of 2.5ha. The total green infrastructure area would be 1.97ha which would include the existing landscaping, watercourses and drainage ponds, public footpaths as well as LEAPs. The previous refused Reserved Matters application’s level of green infrastructure was 1.67ha.

3.8 The proposed dwellings are stated would be a mix of 1-5 bedroom units, with 40% affordable housing provision. Four bungalows, two affordable, and two market are proposed which equates to the 5% as per the Section 106 Agreement. These will be constructed to Building Regulations Part M4(3) standards.

3.9 Car parking will be provided predominantly on-plot in the form of garages and driveway parking.

3.10 The existing landscaping provides a mature site setting of which this is stated would be enhanced where necessary.

3.11 The proposed housing mix is outlined below:

PRIVATE DWELLINGS: 10 x 2 bedroom houses 20 x 3 bedroom houses 14 x 4 bedroom houses 7 x 5 bedroom houses Total Private Dwellings: 51

AFFORDABLE DWELLINGS: 2 x 1 bedroom flat 16 x 2 bedroom flat 8 x 2 bedroom houses 7 x 3 bedroom houses 1 x 4 bedroom houses Total Affordable dwellings: 34

Grand Total: 85

3.12 The housing mix is stated to remain the same for the affordable housing and the private market dwellings have been adjusted to provide more two bedroom dwellings than larger dwellings which has enabled to provide more greenspace. Below is a comparison table of the two housing scheme mix.

3.13 The dwellings will be designed so they will be tenure blind in appearance through the use of the same materials.

3.14 The development would provide settlement edge public open space, including tree and hedgerow planting, habitat creation, a children’s play area and footpath connections.

3.15 It is stated that the development would promote sustainability and reduce energy consumption.

3.16 A Broadband Statement has been submitted together with the planning submission which highlights that BT will provide a full fibre infrastructure to every home of their site in accordance with Part R of the Building Regulations.

4. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

4.1 Town and Country Planning (Environmental Assessment): The proposal is not a Schedule 1 development, exceeds the threshold criteria of Schedule 2, however the application has been screened and an Environmental Assessment is not required as part of the outline application.

4.2 Human Rights Act considerations: There may be implications under Article 1 and Article 8 of the First Protocol regarding the right of respect for a person's private and family life and home, and to the peaceful enjoyment of possessions; however, these issues have been taken into account in the determination of this application.

5. APPLICANT’S CASE

5.1 The following documents have been submitted in support of the application;

The application comprises the following documents and plans:

 Design and Access Statement;  Planning Statement;  Broadband Statement;  Soft Landscape Specification;  Revised Landscape and Ecological Management Plan;  Revised Arboricultural Impact Assessment;  Additional carbon study;  Drainage Statement;

6. RELEVANT SITE HISTORY

6.1 The application site has a long planning history; the most relevant planning applications are listed below;

6.2 UTT/16/2210/OP - Outline planning permission for up to 85 residential dwellings (including 40% affordable housing), introduction of structural planting and landscaping, informal public open space and children's play area, surface water flood mitigation and attenuation, vehicular access point from Little Walden Road and associated ancillary works. All matters to be reserved with the exception of the main site access.

6.3 The above application was refused on 23 December 2016 for the following reasons;

1. The development of this site in open countryside would be visually intrusive and would have a harmful effect upon the character and appearance of this area of the countryside, contrary to Policy S7 and GEN2 of the Uttlesford Local Plan and advice in the National Planning Policy Framework.

2. Having regard to the existing traffic use, forecast growth and the additional traffic which this proposal is likely to generate or attract, the road which connects the proposed access to the town centre and on to key destinations is considered to have insufficient capacity to cater for the proposal while providing safety and efficiency for all road users. It is considered that the residual cumulative impact of the development in this location is severe and application does not provide sufficient mitigation to address this. The proposal is therefore contrary to DM15 contained within the County Highway Authority's Development Management Policies, adopted as County Council Supplementary Guidance in February 2011 and the National Planning Policy Framework 2012.

3. The application fails to address adequately the potential impacts of the proposed development in respect of protected species and upon wildlife generally in the area. The proposals therefore fail to provide adequate protection for protected species as required by the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) and which have Euro- pean protection under the Conservation (Natural Habitats, &c.) Regulations 1994 (as amended) and are contrary to ULP Policy ENV7 and advice in the National Planning Policy Framework.

4. The development fails to make provision at the appropriate time for affordable housing, community facilities, school capacity, public services, transport provision, drainage and other infrastructures contrary to Policies GEN6 & H9 of the adopted Uttlesford Local Plan 2005

6.4 This was granted on appeal on 21 August 2017.

6.5 An alternative scheme was submitted between the Council’s decision and the above appeal decision (UTT/17/0522/OP). Permission was refused 17th May 2017 for the following reasons.

2. The development fails to make provision at the appropriate time for affordable housing, community facilities, school capacity, public services, transport provision, drainage and other infrastructures contrary to Policies GEN6 & H9 of the adopted Uttlesford Local Plan 2005.

No appeal was submitted following this particular refusal.

6.6 UTT/18/2959/DFO - Reserved matters following UTT/16/2210/OP for 85 residential dwellings including all necessary infrastructure and landscaping. Details of appearance, landscaping, layout and scale. This was refused on 1 October 2019 for the following reasons;

6.7 This decision has recently been allowed on appeal by the Planning Inspectorate on 12th May 2020 and has awarded in part costs.

7. POLICIES

7.1 S70(2) of The Town and Country Planning Act 1990 requires the local planning authority, in dealing with a planning application, to have regard to: (a) the provisions of the development plan, so far as material to the application, (aza) a post-examination draft neighbourhood development plan, so far as material to the application, (b) any local finance considerations, so far as material to the application, and (c) any other material considerations.

7.2 S38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 requires that, if regard is to be had to the development plan for the purpose of any determination to be made under the planning Acts, the determination must be made in accordance with the plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise.

7.3 National Policies

- National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (2019) - paragraphs 11, 63, 73, 78-79, 102-111, 127-130, 155-165, 170, 175, 178- 179, 180, 181 & 189-199 Planning Practice Guidance (PPG) - Air quality - Conserving and enhancing the historic environment - Design - Flood risk and coastal change - Housing: optional technical standards - Land affected by contamination - Light pollution - Natural environment - Rural housing

7.4 Uttlesford Local Plan (2005)

- S7 Countryside - GEN1 Access - GEN2 Design - GEN3 Flood Risk - GEN4 Good Neighbourliness - GEN5 Light Pollution - GEN6 Infrastructure Provision to Support Development - GEN7 Nature Conservation - GEN8 Vehicle Parking Standards - ENV3 Open Spaces and Trees - ENV4 Ancient Monuments and Sites of Archaeological Importance - ENV5 Protection of Agricultural Land - ENV7 The Protection of the Natural Environment – Designated Sites - ENV8 Other Landscape Elements of Importance for Nature Conservation - ENV12 Protection of Water Resources - ENV13 Exposure to Poor Air Quality - ENV14 Contaminated Land - ENV15 Renewable Energy - H1 Housing Development - H9 Affordable Housing - H10 Housing Mix

7.5 Supplementary Planning Documents/Guidance

SPD – Accessible Homes and Playspace (2005) The Essex Design Guide Parking Standards: Design and Good Practice (2009) Uttlesford Local Residential Parking Standards (2013)

7.6 Other Material Considerations

NPPF 2019

8. Parish Council

8.1 Yesterday evening our planning committee looked at the revised application for the Little Walden Road site UTT/19/3068/DFO.

On the matters of: Levels of public open space; All dwellings now meeting Nationally Described space Standards; Certainty on broadband provision; and Housing mix,

The Town Council would like to gratefully acknowledge that the new application demonstrates that the developer and UDC planning officers have listened to concerns raised by the TC and have addressed them. The Town Council supports the application on these points.

On the matter of: Energy efficiency / sustainability The members were not clear on whether the new application meets the criteria eLP Policy SP12 – post major modification. Clearly these criteria would be preferable. Could you please advise?

On the matter of the playground:  Local residents attended our meeting and raised questions over the proposed location of the playground, specifically with concerns that the location involves removing mature trees and shrubs.

The members agreed to visit the site for themselves to assess whether perhaps the play area could be moved slightly to avoid removing the existing vegetation, and an- other suggestion was that perhaps the playground could be more of an adventure playground and incorporate the vegetation. The residents agreed that this would be a pragmatic compromise. Our members will visit the site and come back to you on that point.

9. CONSULTATIONS

9.1 NATS SAFEGUARDING RESPONSE The proposed development has been examined from a technical safeguarding aspect and does not conflict with our safeguarding criteria. Accordingly, NATS (En Route) Public Limited Company ("NERL") has no safeguarding objection to the proposal.

9.2.1 UDC HOUSE ENABLING OFFICER

9.2.2 The delivery of affordable housing is one of the council’s corporate priorities and will be negotiated on all sites for housing. The Councils policy requires 40% on all schemes over 0.5ha or 15 or more units.

9.2.3 The affordable housing provision on the site will attract the 40% policy requirement as the site is for 85 (net) units. This amounts to 34 affordable housing units and it is expected that these properties will be delivered by one of the Council’s preferred Registered Providers.

9.2.4 It is also the Council’s policy to require 5% of the whole scheme to be delivered as full wheelchair accessible (building Regulations Part M, Category 3 homes) as well as 5% of all the units to be bungalows delivered as 1 and 2 bedroom units. This would amount to 4 bungalows across the whole site delivered as 2 affordable units and 2 for open market.

9.2.5 The mix and tenure split of the properties are given below; this mix should be indistinguishable from the market housing, in clusters of no more than 10 with good integration within the scheme and be predominantly houses with parking spaces.

9.2.6 Homes should meet the following standards; 1 bed property house 2 people, 2 bed properties house 4 persons, 3 bedroom properties house 5 persons and 4 bedroom properties house 6 persons.

9.2.7 The mix is acceptable although the clusters do not meet policy. The clusters of affordable housing should be more integrated within the scheme and in clusters of no more than 10, without them being contiguous.

9.3 BAA The Safeguarding Authority for Stansted Airport has assessed this proposal and its potential to conflict aerodrome Safeguarding criteria. We have no aerodrome safeguarding objections to the proposal.

9.4 ECC SUDs Having reviewed the submitted documents which accompanied the planning application, the reserve matter application is for appearance, landscaping, layout and scale and is not related to drainage. We do not object to the granting of reserve matter application ref UTT/19/3068/DFO. It should be subject to the same conditions applied to the outline planning application (UTT/16/2210/OP).

The proposed development will only meet the requirements of the National Planning Policy Framework if the measures as detailed in the Drainage strategies and the documents submitted with this application are implemented as approved.

9.5 CRIME PREVENTION OFFICER The design and layout of this development reflects the principles of "Secured by Design" in relation to natural surveillance, perimeters, physical security, landscaping and lighting. UDC Local Plan Policy GEN2 - Design (d) states "It helps reduce the potential for crime" Whilst there are no apparent concerns with the layout however to comment further we would require the finer detail such as the proposed lighting, boundary treatments and physical security measures. We note that the Design and Access Statement says "The design and layout of this development reflects the principles of "Secured by Design" in relation to natural surveillance, perimeters, physical security, landscaping and lighting". We would welcome the opportunity to consult on this development to assist the developer with their obligation under UDC Local Plan Policy GEN2 at the same time as achieving a Secured by Design award. From experience pre-planning consultation is always preferable in order that security, landscaping and lighting considerations for the benefit of the intended residents and those neighbouring the development are agreed prior to a planning application.

9.6.1 ESSEX WILDLIFE TRUST While examining the badger report and the developer’s Design and Access Statement, I noticed that the red line boundary of the proposed development appears to encroach onto the Essex Wildlife Trust Limefields Pit reserve. I have attached a GIS map showing our reserve boundary for your information. I have also attached a copy of the badger report for the benefit of the Trust North-West Area Manager and Area Officer, who are copied in to this email. Figure i, at the end of the badger report, gives a clear picture of the current development boundary. We would ask that clarification is sought on this matter; the development cannot be permitted to incorporate land which is part of a Trust reserve.

9.6.2 N.B: The point that the Wildlife Trust have raised in terms of land ownership, the Redline has not altered from the outline application of which they were previously consulted on. The area that is at dispute is marked above. It should be noted that landownership is not a material planning consideration however it maybe a reason why the development could not be implemented.

9.7 ECC ECOLOGY No objection subject to securing biodiversity and enhancement measures.

9.8 ENVIROMENTAL HEALTH As commented on the previous DFO application UTT/18/2959/DFO, Environmental Health comments at outline stage recommended that opportunities are sought to secure mitigation against increased emissions from vehicles, such as provision of electric vehicle charging points at each parking space or garage. Although not required by the appeal decision notice, best practice in accordance with national planning guidance suggests provision of a charge point at each allocated residential parking space and it is recommended that the layout of the site is amended to make provision for this. It is also recommended that provision of a secure covered space to accommodate cycles is conditioned, for dwellings where a garage is not available.

9.9 UDC LANDSCAPE OFFICER The proposed arrangement and equipment for the play area are considered satisfactory. The soft landscaping proposals are also considered to be satisfactory and can be approved.

9.10 ECC HIGHWAYS From a highway and transportation perspective the impact of the layout and design of the proposal as shown in drawing number 1770/P/110.02/A is acceptable to the Highway Authority subject to mitigation and conditions:

All housing developments in Essex which would result in the creation of a new street (more than five dwelling units communally served by a single all-purpose access) will be subject to The Advance Payments Code, Highways Act, 1980. The Developer will be served with an appropriate Notice within 6 weeks of building regulations approval being granted and prior to the commencement of any development must provide guaranteed deposits which will ensure that the new street is constructed in accordance with acceptable specification sufficient to ensure future maintenance as a public highway.

10. REPRESENTATIONS

10.1 The application has been advertised on site and within the local press. Neighbouring residential occupiers have also been consulted of the application. As a result the following points have been raised:

 Object;  Impact on infrastructure;  Loss of agricultural land;  Not providing the town with anything;  Increased traffic;  Highway safety;  Increased pollution;  Historic roads cannot cope with traffic;  Loss of green space and trees;  Impact on ecology;  Risk of flooding - if private drains are not managed properly;  St Mary’s Primary School objects stating that there is no capacity at this or other SW primary schools. School already has gone over no. due to developments like Limes Avenue now 32 students where there is only space for 30 having a knock on effect on teaching;  I suggest this is added to any marketing material sent out by the property developers to ensure all new families are aware of the oversubscribed schools;  Destruction of Saffron Walden;  Dwellings are not energy efficiency;  Low water pressure in the summer;  There’ll be problems with sewerage;  Overlooking of existing properties on lower ground;  Light loss;  The plan is not that which has been allowed by the inspector;  Drawing H is show play area where scrub land is top of ST Mary’s View this was replaced with Drawing J that moved the play area 130m WNW and maintained the scrubland and trees. Now its decimates the nature park (scrub land and tree area) by moving it back;  Concern regarding diversion of drainage water going to ditch near allotments as they over fill. Ditches build up with rubbish which reduces capacity;

10.2 Comments The principle of the development has already been granted under the outline planning application at appeal. Therefore, the above objections would have been taken into account then.

11. APPRAISAL

The issues to consider in the determination of the application are:

A Principle of development B Design C Mix of Housing and Affordable Housing D Amenity E Highways F Landscaping and Ecology G Flood Risk and Drainage H Archaeology I Infrastructure provision to support the development

A Principle of development

11.1 Compliance with the above policies was addressed at the outline stage whereby the principle of the development was agreed subject to conditions and S106 relating to 40% affordable housing, Education contribution, highway works, provision of a LEAP and provision of public open space including its long term management and maintenance.

B Design

11.2 With regards to the proposed design of the scheme the NPPF and Local Plan Policy GEN2 seeks for quality design, ensuring that development is compatible in scale, form, layout, appearance and materials. The policies aim to protect and enhance the quality, character and amenity value of the countryside and urban areas as a whole seeking high quality design.

11.3 As to whether the scheme would be compatible with the character of the settlement area and countryside, the scheme would see development on the urban fringe of Saffron Walden, outside Development Limits. The site is located adjacent to St Mary’s View development to the south which is a late 80s - early 90s development, with houses to the south, southwest on Little Walden Road. The countryside surrounds the site to the west, north and east.

11.4 The part of the site containing the trees the subject of the TPO would not be developed. There would be a vehicular access from Little Walden Road. In terms of the impact of the proposed development within the character of this countryside location this was assessed in paragraphs 25 -36 of the Appeal Inspector’s decision on the Outline application where it has been established that there would be some impact however it would be localised to the site.

11.5 The proposed dwellings would be a mixture of bungalow, two-storey and two x three storey block of flats, as was within the recently approved appeal scheme. The average density across the site would be 33 dwellings per hectare.

11.6 The proposed development applies a traditional style to a variety of house types, arranged to form well-defined street scenes. Two public open spaces would be created, with that in the south-eastern corner also containing a play area. Taking into account the landscaping proposals for the site boundaries, it is considered that the development would assimilate well into its edge-of town surroundings. It is therefore concluded that the proposal accords with the above policies insofar as they relate to character and appearance.

11.7 The layout of the scheme does not greatly differ from the previous reserved matters however it has been altered to address the previous reasons for refusal in terms of the level of open space provision and internal space standards.

11.8 Appendix C compares the outline approved framework, the previous Reserved Mat- ters layout and the current layout. The Planning Inspector in his recent decision stated “Landscaping, layout and scale are all reserved matters and therefore it is my duty to determine whether the proposal is acceptable on these grounds. While condition 4 of the outline permission requires the reserved matters submission to be delivered in broad accordance with the principles of that approval, the condition does not specifically refer to landscaping. Therefore, I have looked at the illustrative plan re- ferred to in that condition as a whole rather than picking out individual elements of it. The Inspector in that case did not consider open space to be a key issue in his determination, and no minimum provision was required by the condition. As a whole, the scheme before me is broadly in accordance with the outline permission.” He concluded that the development would make sufficient provision for public open space in accordance with Local Plan Policy GEN2. This current scheme increases the level of public open space to be more in line with the Outline Framework and therefore it can only be concluded that this too is acceptable on this basis.

11.9 It is noted that conditions 14, 15 and 20 of the outline planning permission require the separate approval of lighting details, tree protection measures and site section drawings, therefore these are not being considered under this application.

11.10 In terms of materials they are considered to be acceptable with a uniform variation to create a tenure blind appearance. The boundary treatment proposed, whilst the heights and materials for the boundary are considered acceptable their type has not been specified, however, this can be covered by condition should planning permission be granted.

11.11 A Carbon Study has been submitted together with the application in order to address reason for refusal three. The study assessed the proposed properties on;

• Space heating • Water heating • Electricity for pumps and fans • Electricity for lighting

11.12 The proposed dwellings need to adhere to a minimum Building Regulations Standards. All developments take a fabric first approach as has been done here to reduce the level of space heating required and level of heat loss. It is stated that the boilers exceed the minimum boiler efficiency requirement of 86% efficiency by at least achieving 89%. 100% low energy electrical fittings are proposed in all the properties.

11.13 An assessment of all the available energy efficiency measures have been identified and assessed in terms of their viability. As a result it has been concluded that the most cost effective measures is fabric first approach and the use of PV panels. This stated to reduce energy by a further 19.05% (149,667kgCO2/Annum to 121,152kgCO2/ Annum) from the Regulation baseline minimum, which exceeds the draft policy D9 that was in place at the time of the assessment of the previous application. It should be noted that the Draft Plan has since been withdrawn and has no weight nor is a material consideration. For the above reason it is considered that the development accords with Local Plan Policy GEN2 and ENV15 in terms of energy efficiency.

11.14 It should be noted that the Planning Inspector had noted that whilst the development would comply with Building Regulations there is no local plan policies which seek that new developments shall secure further measures beyond Building Regulation requirements and therefore concluded that the development was acceptable in this respect.

11.15 In terms of the installation of broadband, as stated in paragraph 3.6 the provision of broadband infrastructure is a Building Regulation requirement which can be conditioned, in line with the recent Planning Inspector’s decision. A Broadband Statement has been provided as part of the application submission. The Planning Inspector in his decision stated “The Council contends that the scale of development proposed requires evidence that broadband can be provided for future residents. I do not have in evidence any suggestion that the appeal site is especially distant from connections to broadband infrastructure or otherwise poses difficulties that would require unusual action on the part of the developer or broadband provider to connect the development to the network. I am therefore satisfied that an appropriately worded condition requiring connection of each home to the broadband network would be sufficient to address this issue, in accordance with paragraph 112 of the National Planning Policy Framework (the Framework).” As a result the reason for refusal has been addressed and details surrounding the connection to broadband is acceptable and in accordance with the NPPF.

11.16 Taking into account the comments of the Crime Prevention Officer at Essex Police, it is considered that the proposed design ensures that there would be no significant risks of crime. While the advisory comments regarding the Secured by Design initiative are noted, there is no adopted planning policy that requires achievement of a ‘Gold’ award. It is therefore concluded that the proposal accords with the above policies, namely Policy GEN2, insofar as they relate to crime prevention.

11.17 It should be noted that the Planning Inspector noted that the original shortfall in internal space standards was minimal at 1m2 and where no harm had been identified as a result upon the living conditions of the future occupiers and the fact that the Technical Housing Standards is not adopted thereby limited weight has been afforded to this and concluded that “I therefore find that the development proposed would provide acceptable living conditions for the occupiers of the proposed development. It would therefore accord with Policy GEN2 of the LP which requires, amongst other things, that development provides an environment that meets the reasonable needs of all potential users.” The proposed dwellings have been revised to meet minimum space standards requirements which addresses one of the reasons for refusal under the previous Reserved Matters application. Based on this and the Inspectors finding the development is in accordance with Policy GEN2.

11.18 The scheme would also meet Part M of the Building Regulations in terms of accessibility. Condition 19 of the outline planning permission secures compliance with the accessibility standards in Requirement M4(2) and M4(3) of the Building Regulations, in accordance with the above policies. This is in accordance with Local Plan Policy GEN2 and the NPPF.

C Mix of Housing and Affordable Housing

11.19 Adopted Local Plan Policy H9 and requires that 40% affordable housing is provided on sites having regard to market and site conditions. Policy H10 requires that a significant proportion of market housing is provided in the form of small dwellings with two or three bedrooms.

11.20 As 30 of the 51 market homes would fall into this category, it is concluded that the requirement is comfortably met and the proposal therefore accords with Policy H10.

11.21 There would be a range of house types, sizes (ranging 1 to 5 bedrooms) and tenures. This will include housing for sale across a range of prices, with affordable housing to rent and shared equity/ownership.

11.22 The applicants have confirmed that the development would provide 40% affordable housing, which would equate to 34 dwellings, in accordance with the outline planning permission and Policy H9.

11.23 The applicants have also confirmed that the development would provide 5% wheelchair accessible and bungalows (equating to 4 units) to meet wheelchair accessible housing need. It is highlighted that there would be 70% (affordable rent) and 30% (shared ownership) division on the proposed properties to be created. No objection has been raised by the UDC Housing Enabling Officer subject to meeting the above. There was concern that the cluster of affordable housing should be more integrated within the scheme and in clusters of no more than 10, without them being contiguous. There are three units (67-69) which are close to the block of flats (58- 66), whilst this is not ideal in consideration of the layout and the amendments made in order to address the reasons for refusal this is considered to be acceptable and generally in accordance under the circumstances.

D Amenity

11.24 It is considered that there is sufficient land to ensure back to back distances are generally adhered to, minimum direct back to back distance being 24m as opposed to 25m, preventing overlooking both between existing and proposed dwellings, and that there would be sufficient amenity space in accordance with the Essex Design Guide. Various types of open space have been designed as can been seen from the site plan. These will be in the form of landscaped areas, Sustainable Drainage (SUDs) features and play space areas.

11.25 The existing residents would be far enough removed from the new housing so that there would be no issues of overlooking or overshadowing.

11.26 Taking into account The Essex Design Guide it is considered that the proposed private amenity spaces would be of a suitable size and layout. All private rear gardens would meet or exceed the suggested minimum standards, and the 5 sq m balconies/terraces for the flats are considered useable and sufficient for such small dwellings given the easy access to new public open spaces. Taking into account the minimum standards in The Essex Design Guide, it is considered that there would be no significant adverse effects on the amenity of existing or future residents with respect to daylight, privacy or overbearing impacts. It is therefore concluded that the proposal accords with the above policies insofar as they relate to amenity. A copy of the accommodation breakdown can be found in Appendix A.

11.27 In terms of open space and sports provision there is no current policy for, and the draft local plan has since been recently withdrawn and no longer is a material consideration now with no weight. The framework plan which was approved by the Planning Inspector and conditioned (Condition 4 of the Outline consent) has been followed by this revised application, in terms of layout and the level of open space provided. However, third party concerns have been raised regarding;

11.28 “Drawing H is show play area where scrub land is top of ST Mary’s View this was replaced with Drawing J that moved the play area 130m WNW and maintained the scrubland and trees. Now it decimates the nature park (scrub land and tree area) by moving it back”. This has been discussed within this report and it has been addressed in the Inspector’s recent decision in paragraphs 20 & 21, therefore it is concluded that the play areas location is acceptable.

11.29 It is noted that condition 14 of the outline planning permission secures full details of all external lighting.

E Highways

11.30 Local Plan Policy GEN1 states “development will only be permitted if it meets all of the following criteria; a) Access to the main road network must be capable of carrying the traffic generated by the development safely. b) The traffic generated by the development must be capable of being accommodated on the surrounding transport network. c) The design of the site must not compromise road safety and must take account of the needs of cyclists, pedestrians, public transport users, horse riders and people whose mobility is impaired. d) It must be designed to meet the needs of people with disabilities if it is development to which the general public expects to have access. e) The development encourages movement by means other than driving a car.”

11.31 Local Plan Policy GEN1 seeks sustainable modes of transport which is reflected within National Planning Policy Framework.

11.32 Paragraph 109 of the NPPF states “Development should only be prevented or refused on highways grounds if there would be an unacceptable impact on highway safety, or the residual cumulative impacts on the road network would be severe.”

11.33 Sustainable transport and highway capacity were addressed at the Outline stage, with the Reserved Matters application confirming details of the layout, parking provision, pedestrian footpath circulating the site and pedestrian/cycle link to St Mary’s View.

11.34 It is noted that Conditions 5, 6 and 8-11 of the Outline planning permission secure various transport-related details. However, the requirement for electric vehicle charging points in Condition 9 of that permission is not entirely compatible with the most up-to-date national policy at paragraph 110e of the NPPF, which requires developments to “be designed to enable charging of plug-in and other ultra-low emission vehicles in safe, accessible and convenient locations.” It is therefore considered appropriate to secure through a further planning condition full details of how a charging point would be enabled at each dwelling.

11.35 Taking into account the comments of the Highway Authority there were no objection subject to conditions. It is therefore considered that there would be no adverse effects on road safety or efficiency, in accordance with the above policies.

Parking 11.36 A mixture of parking methods would be proposed through the scheme. There are 4 plots which do not adhere to Uttlesford Residential Parking Standards (2013) which have been identified in the Accommodation Schedule Appendix A. However, this is considered to be capable of being addressed through a revised plan as there are unallocated parking spaces near these plots. The scheme is therefore accords with Local Plan Policy GEN8 and The Essex Parking Standards (2009), and Local Residential Parking Standards adopted (February 2013), subject to condition.

F Landscaping and Ecology

11.37 Local Plan Policy ENV8 highlights that development that would adversely affect landscape elements will only be permitted if the need outweighs the harm and mitigation measures are provided.

11.38 Similarly, Paragraph 170 of the NPPF states “Planning policies and decisions should contribute to and enhance the natural and local environment by:

a) protecting and enhancing valued landscapes, sites of biodiversity or geological value and soils (in a manner commensurate with their statutory status or identified quality in the development plan);

b) recognising the intrinsic character and beauty of the countryside, and the wider benefits from natural capital and ecosystem services – including the economic and other benefits of the best and most versatile agricultural land, and of trees and woodland;

c) maintaining the character of the undeveloped coast, while improving public access to it where appropriate;

d) minimising impacts on and providing net gains for biodiversity, including by establishing coherent ecological networks that are more resilient to current and future pressures;

e) preventing new and existing development from contributing to, being put at unacceptable risk from, or being adversely affected by, unacceptable levels of soil, air, water or noise pollution or land instability. Development should, wherever possible, help to improve local environmental conditions such as air and water quality, taking into account relevant information such as river basin management plans; and

f) remediating and mitigating”

11.39 A Landscape Management and Ecology Plan has been submitted as part of the application. This highlighted a 10 year management for all areas of habitat and landscaping other than those within the curtilages of individual dwellings for residential phases. This includes management measures specified for the Public Open Space to ensure that reptile habitat that the site supports will be managed appropriately and the lizard population will be conserved in the site.

11.40 As part of the proposed development new planting is proposed including and assimilate existing woodland and adjacent local wildlife site which will significantly enhance the buffer planting and improve biodiversity and provide an enhanced wildlife corridor.

11.41 The proposed development would be an extension of the existing built form and could be designed to be assimilated into the wider environment. The ground levels would alter as a result of the proposed development.

11.42 The following lower category trees are proposed as part of the scheme;

11.43 With regard to the hedgerow that forms G6, a 70m section will need to be removed to facilitate the consented access road. Replacement planting along the western edge has been proposed but set back from the visibility splays. The Aboricultural report goes on to state that “Groups G10 and section of G1 have all been graded as low- quality category C and are made up of dense understory scrub that’s grown with competing crowns. Where removed these will be replaced with a comprehensive planting scheme that will allow for specimen trees to grow to their full potential.”

11.44 It has been confirmed that all moderate to high-quality trees are to be retained and works are proposed to some trees in terms of pruning, crown lifting and reduction. Protective fencing is proposed to be erected during construction works, in accordance with Condition 15 of the Outline consent.

11.45 The UDC Landscape Officer has raised no objection. The scheme is therefore considered to accord with Local Plan Policies S7, GEN2, GEN7, ENV3 and ENV8, also the NPPF.

11.46 Local Plan Policy GEN7 for nature conservation seeks that development that would have harmful effects upon wildlife or geological features will not be permitted unless the need for development outweighs the harm. It also seeks that a conservation survey be sought for sites that are likely to be ecologically sensitive with associated mitigation measures.

11.47 An ecological survey has been undertaken and submitted with the application following undertaking a Biodiversity Checklist which identified the sites ecological sensitivities.

11.48 As outlined in Section 9 ECC Ecology have raised no objection subject to securing biodiversity mitigation and enhancement measures.

11.49 Taking into account the comments of the Council’s Ecological consultant, it is considered unlikely that the development would have significant adverse effects on any protected species or valuable habitats. It is therefore concluded that the proposal accords with the above policies.

11.50 The suggested condition relating to lighting details effectively duplicates condition 14 of the outline planning permission and is therefore considered unnecessary. It is noted that conditions 12 and 13 of the outline permission require the approval of ecological details, which have also been submitted with the current application and found to be acceptable.

11.51 In respect of ecology and trees the proposed development is considered to be in accordance with Local Plan Policies S7, GEN2, GEN7, ENV3 and ENV8, and NPPF Paragraph 170.

G Flood Risk and Drainage

11.52 Local Plan Policy GEN3 seeks the protection of functional floodplains and buildings would not be permitted unless there is an exceptional need. It goes onto state “Within areas of flood risk, within the development limit, development will normally be permitted where the conclusions of a flood risk assessment demonstrate an adequate standard of flood protection and there is no increased risk of flooding elsewhere…….Outside flood risk areas development must not increase the risk of flooding through surface water run-off. A flood risk assessment will be required to demonstrate this. Sustainable Drainage Systems should also be considered as an appropriate flood mitigation measure in the first instance.”

11.53 Due to the scale of the proposed development a Flood Risk Assessment has been undertaken and submitted as part of the Outline application, in accordance with Policy requirements. The application site falls within Flood Risk Zone 1 where there is low probability of flooding from tidal or fluvial sources. This is reflected in the topography of the land. The site is stated to be located within a negligible risk of groundwater flooding and groundwater flooding incidence has a chance of less than 1% (1 in 1,000 year) annual probability of occurrence. The assessment has been undertaken to demonstrate that the proposed development would not increase the risk of flooding outside of the application site.

11.54 This revised Reserved Matters application has resulted in some minor changes however the drainage design principles remain unaltered. An Updated Drainage Statement has been submitted as part of the application. It is stated “all post- development surface water run-off will be managed on site via infiltration devices that provide sufficient treatment and attenuation for flows up to and including the 1in100year storm event plus an allowance of 40% for climate change. Run-off from roads that are to be offered to Essex Highways under a S38 agreement will be conveyed via a gravity system to an attenuation basin with sediment fore-bays for additional treatment, and disposed of via infiltration. The storm water sewers serving the highways will be offered for adoption under the same agreement, whilst the infiltration basin will be maintained by a private management company appointed by the developer. Run-off from private areas and roofs will be stored and discharged through permeable paving and cellular storage crates. Foul water will be discharged from site via a pumping station and rising main that will be offered to Anglian Water for adoption under a S104 agreement.”

11.55 Flood risk was considered as part of the Outline application during the appeal. As result of Outline planning permission being granted conditions 16, and 17 were attached seeking limiting the discharge levels, storage and limiting the risk of flooding during construction.

11.56 ECC SUDs have been consulted of the application and as a result they have raised no objections subject to conditions within the outline consent being adhered to.

11.57 The development is therefore considered to be in accordance with Policy GEN3 of the adopted Local Plan.

H Archaeology:

11.58 Local Plan Policy ENV4 seeks the protection of archaeological remains.

11.59 Compliance with the above policies was addressed at the outline stage, with Condition 18 of the permission securing appropriate archaeological investigation. This is therefore in accordance with Local Plan Policy ENV4 and the NPPF.

I Infrastructure

11.60 Contributions towards off-site infrastructure were secured where appropriate through the Outline planning permission. In view of this, it is evident that the necessary infrastructure can be provided to meet the needs of the development, in accordance with Policy GEN6 of the Local Plan.

12. CONCLUSION

The following is a summary of the main reasons for the recommendation:

12.1 The submitted Reserved Matters would not cause conflict with the development plan or the NPPF, and no material considerations indicate that the application should be refused. The previous reasons for refusal are considered to be addressed through the above revised scheme which has the support of Saffron Walden Town Council. Nonetheless, the previous refused Reserved Matters application has since been allowed on appeal together with part costs which is a material consideration in this assessment. It is therefore recommended that approval be granted subject to conditions.

RECOMMENDATION – CONDITIONAL APPROVAL

1. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of 3 years from the date of this decision.

REASON: To comply with the requirements of Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended by Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

2. Prior to any works above slab level, full details of the following external finishes for the dwellings (including samples and/or photographs as appropriate) must be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority: - Walls - Roof - Windows - Doors

The development must be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

REASON: To ensure compatibility with the character of the area, in accordance with Policy S7 and Policy GEN2 of the Uttlesford Local Plan (adopted 2005) and the National Planning Policy Framework.

3. Prior to occupation of any dwelling, full details of the following hard landscaping works (including samples and/or photographs as appropriate) must be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority:

- Hard surfaces - Boundary treatment

All hard landscape works must be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

REASON: To ensure compatibility with the character of the area and the incorporation of crime prevention measures, in accordance with Policy S7 and Policy GEN2 of the Uttlesford Local Plan (adopted 2005) and the National Planning Policy Framework.

4. Prior to any works above slab level for the Substation and Pump Station shown on Drawing No. 1770/P/110.02A (Revised Site Layout), full details of its elevations and external finishes must be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The substation and Pump Station must be erected in accordance with the approved details.

5. Prior to occupation of each dwelling, full details of works to enable the installation of a safe, convenient and accessible electric vehicle charging point must be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Thereafter the works must be completed in accordance with the approved details for each dwelling prior to its occupation.

REASON: To promote sustainable transport, in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework.

6. All planting, seeding or turfing and soil preparation comprised in the approved landscaping details must be carried out in the first planting and seeding seasons following the occupation of the buildings, the completion of the development, or in agreed phases whichever is the sooner, and any plants which within a period of five years from the completion of the development die, are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased must be replaced in the next planting season with others of similar size and species, unless the local planning authority gives written consent to any variation. All landscape works must be carried out in accordance with the guidance contained in British Standards, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority.

REASON: To ensure compatibility with the character of the area, in accordance with Policy S7 and Policy GEN2 of the Uttlesford Local Plan (adopted 2005) and the National Planning Policy Framework.

7. All mitigation and enhancement measures and/or works shall be carried out in accordance with the details contained in Landscape Ecological Management Plan (ACD Environment, December 2019), as already submitted with the planning application and agreed in principle with the local planning authority prior to determination.

This may include the appointment of an appropriately competent person e.g. an ecological clerk of works (ECoW) to provide onsite ecological expertise during construction. The appointed person shall undertake all activities, and works shall be carried out, in accordance with the approved details.

REASON: To conserve and enhance Protected and Priority species and allow the LPA to discharge its duties under the UK Habitats Regulation, the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 as amended and S40 of the NERC Act 2006 (priority habitats and species) and in accordance with Policy GEN7 of the Uttlesford Local Plan (adopted 2005) and the National Planning Policy Framework.

8. A construction environmental management plan (CEMP: Biodiversity) shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority.

The CEMP (Biodiversity) shall include the following; a) Risk assessment of potentially damaging construction activities b) Identification of ‘Biodiversity protection zones’ c) Practical measures (both physical measures and sensitive working practices) d) The location and timing of sensitive works to avoid harm to biodiversity e) The times during construction when specialist ecologists need to be present on site to oversee works f) Responsible persons and lines of communication g) The roles and responsibilities on site of an ecological clerk of works (ECoW) or similar competent person h) Use of protective fences, exclusion barriers and warning signs Containment, control and removal of any Invasive non-native species present on site. The approved CEMP shall be adhered to and implemented throughout the construction period strictly in accordance with the approved details, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority.

9. No development shall take place, including any ground works or demolition, until a Construction Management Plan has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the local planning authority. The approved Plan shall be adhered to throughout the construction period. The Plan shall provide for:

i. the parking of vehicles of site operatives and visitors ii. loading and unloading of plant and materials iii. storage of plant and materials used in constructing the development iv. wheel and underbody cleaning facilities v. Before and after surveys of Little Walden Road in the vicinity of the proposed access and subsequent reinstatement of any highway (including verge) caused by construction traffic.

REASON: To ensure that on-street parking of these vehicles in the adjoining streets does not occur and to ensure that loose materials and spoil are not brought out onto the highway, in the interests of highway safety and in accordance with Policy GEN1 of the Uttlesford Local Plan (adopted 2005) and the National Planning Policy Framework.

10. Prior to occupation of each dwelling, its associated garage or cycle store must be completed in accordance with the EPOA Parking Standards. The approved facility shall be secure, convenient, covered and provided prior to occupation and retained at all times.

REASON: To ensure appropriate cycle parking provision is made, in accordance with Policy GEN1 of the Uttlesford Local Plan (adopted 2005) and the National Planning Policy Framework.

11. The proposed turning head shown adjacent to the pump station on Drawing 1770/P/110.02/A shall conform to the Essex Design Guide for Type 3 turning head and be constructed to adoptable standards, and maintained free from permanent obstruction within the site at all times for that sole purpose.

REASON: To ensure that large vehicles including refuse vehicles can safely navigate the site, in accordance with Policy GEN1 of the Uttlesford Local Plan (adopted 2005) and the National Planning Policy Framework.

12. Prior to occupation traffic calming measures shall be provided on the main access road through the site, details of which shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority in consultation with Essex County Highways.

REASON: In the interest of highway safety in accordance with DM1 of the Development Management Policies as adopted as County Council Supplementary Guidance in February 2011 and in accordance with Policy GEN1 of the Uttlesford Local Plan (2005).

13. Prior to the commencement of the development above slab level details of how superfast broadband infrastructures will be delivered to every household, subject to network capacity being available, shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local planning Authority. The agreed superfast broadband infrastructures shall thereafter be installed prior to the first occupation of each associated dwelling within the development.

REASON: To ensure future proofing dwellings and their sustainability in accordance with paragraph 112 of the National Planning Policy Framework.

14. A minimum of a single electric vehicle charging point shall be provided, fully wired and connected, at each house prior to its first occupation.

REASON: To promote sustainable transport, in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework.

15. Notwithstanding the submitted Parking Plan drawing no.1770/P/110.06A (Revised Parking Plan) a revised plan shall be submitted to prior to the commencement of development and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority providing an additional parking space for Plots 3, 33, 36, 39 in accordance with Uttlesford Residential Parking Standards (2013).

REASON: In the interest of highway safety and in accordance with Policy GEN1 of the Uttlesford Local Plan (2005).

APPENDIX A

ACCOMMODATION SCHEDULE

Number Garden Plot of Amenity Number of Parking Number Tenure Bedrooms Size (m2) Spaces 1 Market 4 136 3 2 Market 3 102 2 2 (room to front of 3 Market 4 127 parking) 4 Market 3 115 2 5 Market 4 143 3 6 Market 3 135 2 7 Market 3 118 2 8 Market 2 66 2 9 Market 3 126 2 10 Affordable 4 122 3 11 Affordable 2 71 2 12 Affordable 2 63 2 13 Affordable 2 63 2 14 Affordable 2 63 2 15 Affordable 2 62 2 16 Affordable 3 100 2 17 Market 3 100 2 18 Market 3 101 2 19 Market 3 111 2 20 Market 2 69 2 21 Market 2 62 2 22 Market 3 101 2 23 Affordable 2 - 2 24 Affordable 1 - 1 25 Affordable 1 - 1 26 Affordable 2 - 2 27 Affordable 2 - 2 28 Affordable 2 - 2 29 Affordable 2 - 2 30 Affordable 2 - 2 31 Affordable 2 - 2 32 Market 2 104 2 2 Unallocated space 33 Market 5 109 opposite) 34 Market 4 100 3 2(unallocated space 35 Market 4 109 opposite) 36 Market 5 168 2(unallocated space opposite) 37 Market 5 236 3 38 Market 5 160 3 3(unallocated space 39 Market 4 109 opposite) 40 Market 3 105 2 41 Market 4 103 3 42 Market 4 113 2 43 Market 3 100 2 44 Market 3 104 2 45 Market 3 104 2 46 Market 3 104 2 47 Market 3 100 2 48 Market 3 103 2 49 Affordable 3 118 2 50 Affordable 3 118 2 Affordable 51 Bungalow 2 101 2 Affordable 52 Bungalow 2 115 2 53 Market 3 102 2 54 Market 2 54 2 55 Market 2 55 2 56 Market 3 56 2 57 Market 4 102 3 58 Affordable 2 - 2 59 Affordable 2 - 2 60 Affordable 2 - 2 61 Affordable 2 - 2 62 Affordable 2 - 2 63 Affordable 2 - 2 64 Affordable 2 - 2 65 Affordable 2 - 2 66 Affordable 2 - 2 67 Affordable 2 67 2 68 Affordable 3 103 2 69 Affordable 3 110 2 70 Market 4 112 3 71 Market 2 52 2 72 Market 2 58 2 73 Market 2 63 2 74 Market 4 111 3 75 Market 5 126 3 76 Market 5 140 3 77 Market 4 151 3 78 Market 4 146 3 79 Market 5 159 3 80 Market 4 109 3 Market 81 Bungalow 2 77 2 82 Affordable 3 102 2 83 Affordable 3 113 2 84 Market 3 111 2 Market 85 Bungalow 2 89 2

APPENDIX B

APPEAL DECISION NOTICES RELATING TO UTT/16/2210/OP & UTT/18/2959/DFO

APPENDIX C Comparison between approved Framework Plan and proposed site plan Extract from Framework Plan (6825-L-03 Rev J):

Extract from proposed site plan (1770/01 A):

Extract from refused Reserved Matters site plan (1770/01 A):

Extract from proposed site plan

APPENDIX D

Plans assessed as part of this application;

1. 1770/P/110.01 LOCATION PLAN *

2. 1770/P/110.02A REVISED SITE LAYOUT *

3. 1770/P/110.03A REVISED BOUNDARY TREATMENT PLAN *

4. 1770/P/110.04A REVISED MATERIALS PLAN *

5. 1770/P/110.05A REVISED GARDEN AREAS *

6. 1770/P/110.06A REVISED PARKING PLAN *

7. 1770/P/110.07A REVISED GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE *

8. 1770/P/110.08 AFFORDABLE LOCATION PLAN *

9. 1770/P/120.01 PLOT 85 (TYPE SAF 21) - FLOOR PLAN

10. 1770/P/120.02 PLOT 85 (TYPE SAF 21) – ELEVATIONS

11. 1770/P/120.101 PLOTS 35, 42 (TYPE SAF 6) - FLOOR PLANS

12. 1770/P/120.102 PLOTS 35, 42 (TYPE SAF 6) – ELEVATIONS

13. 1770/P/120.11 PLOT 81 (TYPE SAF 22) - FLOOR PLAN

14. 1770/P/120.111 PLOTS 3, 34, 70 (TYPE SAF 15) - PLANS

15. 1770/P/120.112 PLOTS 3, 34, 60 (TYPE SAF 15) – ELEVATION

16. 1770/P/120.12 PLOT 81 (TYPE SAF 22) - ELEVATIONS

17. 1770/P/120.121 PLOT 80 (TYPE SAF 7) - PLANS

18. 1770/P/120.122 PLOT 80 (TYPE SAF 7) – ELEVATIONS

19. 1770/P/120.131 PLOTS 41, 74 (TYPE SAF 8) – PLANS

20. 1770/P/120.132 PLOTS 41, 74 (TYPE SAF 8) – ELEVATIONS

21. 1770/P/120.141 PLOTS 78, 5 (TYPE SAF 16) - PLANS

22. 1770/P/120.142 PLOTS 78, 5 (TYPE SAF 16) - ELEVATIONS

23. 1770/P/120.151 PLOTS 33, 75 (TYPE SAF 19) - FLOOR PLANS

24. 1770/P/120.152 PLOTS 33, 75 (TYPE SAF 19) – ELEVATIONS

25. 1770/P/120.161 PLOTS 76, 79, 36, 37, 38 (TYPE SAF 17) - PLANS 26. 1770/P/120.162 PLOTS 76, 79, 36, 37, 38 (TYPE SAF 17) –ELEVATIONS

27. 1770/P/120.171 REVISED PLOTS 47, 48 (SAF 23) FLOOR PLAN *

28. 1770/P/120.172 REVISED PLOTS 47, 48 (SAF 23) ELEVATIONS *

29. 1770/P/120.201 PLOTS 51, 52 (TYPE AFF 1) - FLOOR PLANS

30. 1770/P/120.202 PLOTS 51, 52 (TYPE AFF 1) – ELEVATIONS

31. 1770/P/120.21 PLOTS 54, 55, 71, 72, 73 (TYPE SAF 20) FLOOR PLANS

32. 1770/P/120.22 PLOTS 54, 55, 71, 72, 73 (SAF 20) –ELEVATIONS

33. 1770/P/120.211 PLOTS 11, 13, 15, 12, 14, 67 (AFF 2) FLOOR PLAN

34. 1770/P/120.212 PLOTS 11, 13, 15, 12, 14, 67 (AFF 2) ELEVATIONS

35. 1770/P/120.221A REVISED PLOTS 16, 49,50,68,69,82,83 (AFF3) PLANS *

36. 1770/P/120.222A REVISED PLOTS 16, 49, 50, 68, 69 (AFF 3)ELEVATIONS 1*

37. 1770/P/120.223 REVISED PLOTS 82, 83 (AFF 3) ELEVATION *

38. 1770/P/120.231 PLOT 10 (TYPE AFF 4) - FLOOR PLANS

39. 1770/P/120.232 PLOT 10 (TYPE AFF 4) – ELEVATIONS

40. 1770/P/120.31 PLOTS 21, 8, 20 (TYPE SAF 12) - FLOOR PLAN

41. 1770/P/120.32 PLOTS 21, 8, 20 (TYPE SAF 12) – ELEVATION

42. 1770/P/120.41A REV PLOTS 2,9,17,22,32,53,56,84 (SAF1)FLOOR PLANS *

43. 1770/P/120.42 PLOTS 17, 32, 53, 56, 2, 9, 22 (SAF1) ELEVATIONS 1

44. 1770/P/120.43A REVISED PLOT 84 (SAF 1) ELEVATIONS 2 *

45. 1770/P/120.51 PLOTS 44, 46, 43, 45 (SAF 3) – PLAN

46. 1770/P/120.52 PLOTS 44, 46, 43, 45 (SAF 3) – ELEVATIONS

47. 1770/P/120.61 PLOTS 6, 7 (SAF 13) - FLOOR PLANS

48. 1770/P/120.62 PLOTS 6, 7 (SAF 13) – ELEVATIONS

49. 1770/P/120.71 PLOTS 4, 19, 18, 40 (SAF 14) – PLAN

50. 1770/P/120.72 PLOTS 4, 19, 18, 40 (SAF 14) – ELEVATIONS

51. 1770/P/120.81 PLOTS 77, 39 (SAF 5) - PLANS

52. 1770/P/120.82 PLOTS 77, 39 (SAF 5) - ELEVATIONS

53. 1770/P/120.91 PLOTS 1, 57 (SAF 18) - FLOOR PLANS 54. 1770/P/120.92 PLOTS 1, 57 (SAF 18) - FRONT AND REAR

55. 1770/P/120.93 PLOTS 1, 57 (SAF 18) - SIDE ELEVATION *

56. 1770/P/130.01 PLOTS 23-31 (FLAT BLOCK) - GROUND FLOOR *

57. 1770/P/130.02 PLOTS 23-31 (FLAT BLOCK) - FIRST FLOOR PLAN *

58. 1770/P/130.03 PLOTS 23-31 (FLAT BLOCK) - SECOND FLOOR *

59. 1770/P/130.04 PLOTS 23-31 (FLAT BLOCK) - ROOF PLAN *

60. 1770/P/130.05 PLOTS 23-31 (FLAT BLOCK) - FRONT ELEVATION *

61. 1770/P/130.06 PLOTS 23-31 (FLAT BLOCK) - REAR ELEVATION *

62. 1770/P/130.07 PLOTS 23-31 (FLAT BLOCK) - SIDE ELEVATION *

63. 1770/P/130.08 PLOTS 23-31 (FLAT BLOCK) - SIDE ELEVATION *

64. 1770/P/130.11 PLOTS 58-66 (FLAT BLOCK) - GROUND FLOOR *

65. 1770/P/130.12 PLOTS 58-66 (FLAT BLOCK) - FIRST FLOOR PLAN

66. 1770/P/130.13 PLOTS 58-66 (FLAT BLOCK) - SECOND FLOOR

67. 1770/P/130.14 PLOTS 58-66 (FLAT BLOCK) - ROOF PLAN

68. 1770/P/130.15 PLOTS 58-66 (FLAT BLOCK) - FRONT ELEVATION

69. 1770/P/130.16 PLOTS 58-66 (FLAT BLOCK) - REAR ELEVATION

70. 1770/P/130.17 A PLOTS 58-66 (FLAT BLOCK) - SIDE ELEVATION

71. 1770/P/130.18 PLOTS 58-66 (FLAT BLOCK) - SIDE ELEVATION

72. 1770/P/140.01A REVISED STREET SCENES 1,2,3,4 AND 6 *

73. 1770/P/140.02A REVISED STREET SCENES 5,7 AND 8 *

74. 1770/P/150.01 SINGLE GARAGE

75. 1770/P/150.02 TWIN GARAGE

76. 1770/P/150.03 SINGLE STORE

77. 1770/P/150.04 TWIN STORE

78. ABBEY22721-03B REVISED TREE PROTECTION PLAN *

79. ABBEY22721-11 1 OF 5 PROPOSED LANDSCAPE PROPOSALS *

80. ABBEY22721-11 2 OF 5 SOFT LANDSCAPE PROPOSALS *

81. ABBEY22721-11 3 OF 5 SOFT LANDSCAPE PROPOSALS * 82. ABBEY22721-11 4 OF 5 REVISED SOFT LANDSCAPE PROPOSALS *

83. ABBEY22721-11 5 OF 5 REVISED SOFT LANDSCAPE PROPOSALS *

84. E3843/719/B PROPOSED CYCLEWAY LINK

85. E3843/795/F HIGHWAYS LAYOUTS SWEPT PATH ANALYSIS – Fire

86. E3843/796/G HIGHWAYS LAYOUTS SWEPT PATK ANALYSIS – Refuse

87. E3843/797/F HIGHWAY LAYOUTS SWEPT PATH ANALYSIS - Tanker

Application: UTT/19/3068/DFO Address: Land East of Little Walden Road, Saffron Walden