Welwyn Hatfield Local Plan Stage 2 Hearing Statement
Aurora Properties (UK) Ltd 9 October 2017 Welwyn Hatfield Local Plan Stage 2 Hearing Statement – Aurora Properties (UK) Ltd
Contents
1 Introduction 2 2 Full Objectively Assessed Housing Need 3 3 Green Belt Review 4 4 Spatial Vision & Settlement Strategy 6 5 Targets for Growth 8 6 Five Year Land Supply 9 7 Conclusions 10
Appendix 1: SHMA (2014) Figure 5.19
Appendix 2: Brookmans Park Historic Maps
Appendix 3: Housing Distribution, Coalescence & Cumulative Impact Report
Appendix 4: Site Selection Analysis
Appendix 5: Aurora Report on Primary School Capacity
Appendix 6: Hogan Lovells Correspondence
1 Welwyn Hatfield Local Plan Stage 2 Hearing Statement – Aurora Properties (UK) Ltd
1 Introduction
This hearing statement has been prepared by Deloitte LLP on behalf of Aurora Properties (UK) Limited (Aurora).
Aurora is promoting two sites in Brookmans Park, BrP1 and BrP12. Both sites passed the Stage 2 HELAA process.
BrP12 was considered suitable for allocation in the Housing Sites Selection Paper 2016 (HOU/20); but was not then allocated by WHBC due to a perceived lack of primary school capacity in Brookmans Park. It was the only site in WHBC to be found suitable for allocation, but not allocated. The reason for not allocating BrP12 is contrary to national planning guidance.
The Council’s reasons for not allocating BrP1 are disputed by Aurora. Those are matters for the Stage 3 and 4 sessions.
Aurora’s detailed representation is dated October 2016 (the Representation). The Representation remains Aurora’s primary evidence supporting its objection. Aurora has also submitted a Stage 1 Hearing Statement.
Aurora maintains its position that the Local Plan is not sound, however it can be made sound through the examination process.
2 Welwyn Hatfield Local Plan Stage 2 Hearing Statement – Aurora Properties (UK) Ltd
2 Full Objectively Assessed Housing Need
Aurora supports the uplift to the demographic starting point for the Council’s FOAHN. Paragraphs 6.4 -6.16 of Aurora’s Stage 1 Statement addresses concerns with the Council’s approach.
These adjustments are necessary due to acute affordability problems and economic factors.
Figure 5.19 (Appendix 1) of the 2014 SHMA identifies the affordability of homes in the borough. Welwyn Hatfield has an affordability ratio of approximately 10 times income within the borough1. The affordability ratios are even more acute for villages such as Brookmans Park (19.7:1) and Cuffley (16.8:1).
Paragraph 2.18 of the Submission Local Plan identifies WHBC as having 1.11 jobs for every working age resident. This is the 13th highest for all UK local authorities excluding inner London.
Significant weight should be given to these market signals as part of the FOAHN and the housing distribution strategy.
The lack of development, in the absence of an up to date Local Plan, has constrained growth in the borough.
This is exemplified in the villages such as Brookmans Park, Cuffley and Welham Green, where the Green Belt has remained unaltered since the 1980s.
HOU/22 describes the negative impacts arising from not meeting the FOAHN2. These impacts relate particularly and significantly to younger people and the affordability of homes. This could restrict the retention and attraction of a high quality workforce.
1 The figures are based on the lower quartile house price and lower quartile income. 2 Please refer to paragraph 6.16 of Aurora’s Stage 1 Hearing Statement.
3 Welwyn Hatfield Local Plan Stage 2 Hearing Statement – Aurora Properties (UK) Ltd
3 Green Belt Review
Objective Assessment The Council’s review of the Green Belt3 has been flawed from inception. This has resulted in the overstated importance of the Green Belt in certain areas and significant inconsistency. Aurora’s evidence has focussed on the south of the borough.
The Council has persisted with a flawed ‘local settlement pattern’ test for Green Belt which is inappropriate and poorly defined. The adopted Local Plan 2005 (paragraph 4.2) claims that the settlement pattern in the borough has unique qualities based on “….medium sized towns and villages, situated along main road and railway routes radiating northwards from London”. There is no evidence to support the unique qualities or distinctive settlement pattern that necessitates this test. It goes against the tests set out in the Framework.
The primary purpose of this test appears to be the protection of the larger villages. The larger villages have only been developed in the post-war period and do not have any significant historic merit.
Brookmans Park was developed from the 1930s following the construction of a new railway station in 1928 for the specific purpose to create a commuter settlement for London and other nearby towns. That purpose remains as relevant today as it did in the 1930’s. The historic maps in Appendix 2 show the development and growth of Brookmans Park since 1930. Housing growth ceased in the mid 1960’s and the village has remained largely in its present form since then.
The Council’s site selection process has introduced the concept of cumulative impact to restrict the allocation of sites in the Green Belt. However, Aurora is not aware of any objective assessment by the Council to analyse options or consider alternative options.
In the absence of such an assessment, Aurora commissioned its own study4 (Appendix 3). This report focuses on the villages in the south of the borough. The report also identifies a number of issues with the Council’s Green Belt review relating to the strategic gaps.
Map 1 of Appendix 3 (page 6) assesses the strategic and fragile gaps in the south of the borough. This is broader than the Council’s assessment as it considers the cross boundary impact on the strategic gap between South Hatfield and Potters Bar (within Hertsmere), west of the East Coast Mainline Railway.
The Aurora study provides a thorough analysis of the cumulative impact of releasing sites around Brookmans Park, Welham Green and Little Heath. No such assessment has been undertaken by the Council, yet it makes judgements in the site selection process.
Aurora’s assessment identifies that sites for 790 new homes could be released from the Green Belt in this area where harm is limited and no cumulative impact is caused. The report also concludes that HAT11/HS11 and BrP4/HS22 are within a fragile gap, in open countryside, beyond a strong and permanent Green Belt boundary and should not be preferred for allocation.
3 GB/1, GB/2, GB/3 4 Housing Distribution, Coalescence and Cumulative Impact Study for Brookmans Park, Welham Green, Little Heath and South Hatfield; Liz lake Associates; Appendix 20 of the Representation.
4 Welwyn Hatfield Local Plan Stage 2 Hearing Statement – Aurora Properties (UK) Ltd
Exceptional Circumstances Aurora agrees with the Council that exceptional circumstances have been demonstrated to release land from the Green Belt5. There would be significant and negative economic and social consequences arising from the failure to meet its FOAHN and support economic growth.
Having identified the exceptional circumstances for the release of land from the Green Belt, the Council has not adopted robust or consistent criteria to identify and allocate those sites which are most appropriate for release to meet its FOAHN.
Acknowledging that exceptional circumstances exist, the Council should have followed the guidance in paragraph 14 of the Framework. The Council should have (i) examined the sustainability and suitability of each individual site, (ii) identified whether any adverse impacts would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits of allocating that site and (iii) weighed any adverse impacts against the benefits of meeting the FOAHN in full. These three stages should be followed sequentially, objectively, consistently and with the balance in favour of sustainable development.
Green Belt Boundaries A number of allocations proposed will result in significantly weaker long term Green Belt boundaries than the existing and, in several instances, breach very strong and permanent Green Belt boundaries. For example:
BrP4 breaches the strong and permanent western boundary of Brookmans Park, defined by the East Coast Mainline Railway. This creates a much weaker Green Belt boundary to the west of the village, it creates a disconnected community and it encroaches into the strategic gap between South Hatfield and Potters Bar6.
HAT11 crosses the strong and permanent Green Belt boundary of South Hatfield as defined by South Way7. It encroaches into a fragile gap between Hatfield and Welham Green, creating a weaker Green Belt boundary and a disconnected community. It also encroaches into the strategic gap between South Hatfield and Potters Bar.
The Council has not created long-term boundaries that will endure beyond the Local Plan period (paragraph 85 of the Framework). The Council’s current strategy relies on an early review of its Local Plan, which contradicts its “Borough-wide Strategic Objectives”8 which state “Green Belt boundaries will not need reviewing before 2032”. The failure to allocate sufficient sites, thus causing the need for an early review of the Local Plan, will inevitably lead to further alterations to Green Belt boundaries in the plan period. This is contrary to the Local Plan and paragraph 83 of the Framework.
There are a number of sites around the existing settlements that, if released, would satisfy paragraphs 83, 84 and 85 of the Framework. These sites are identified in Appendix 39.
5 Paragraphs 1.2 and 1.7 of TPA/2 Topic Paper – Green Belt. 6 Please refer to Appendix 3, page 6, Map 1. 7 Please refer to Appendix 3, page 17, paragraph 5.11 8 WHBC Submission Local Plan, Objective 1, page 30 9Appendix 3 page 36 - Table 3 Site Selection and Map 4 page 37
5 Welwyn Hatfield Local Plan Stage 2 Hearing Statement – Aurora Properties (UK) Ltd
4 Spatial Vision & Settlement Strategy
The Representation considered this matter at paragraphs 4.1 – 4.6.
The Council has approached site selection in a flawed manner from the start of the process.
The report to the Council’s Cabinet (HOU/6) set out six options for future housing growth. This included two recommended options, one directing growth to Welwyn Garden City and Hatfield (option 4) and one directing growth to these settlements and limited expansion of the larger villages (option 6). The Planning Officers and the Council’s independent consultant both advanced option 6 as the more sustainable option.
The minutes of the meeting state:
“Although option 6 which identified growth around the large villages, was arguably the more sustainable option, there had been substantial objection from the local community to such growth. The panel took residents views into account and whilst both options required a similar amount of development around towns, it was considered that to recommend option 6 in the face of the large amount of objection would have been perverse”.
The Council has persisted throughout the emergence of the Local Plan to pursue a negative approach to development in the four large villages. As a result, the Council has failed to make site allocations based on key planning considerations, such as sustainability and impact on Green Belt.
The villages of Brookmans Park, Welham Green and Cuffley are connected by rail to London. Rail services from Brookmans Park and Welham Green also connect to Potters Bar, Hatfield and Welwyn Garden City. This is important when considering the strategy for growth as it can capitalise on existing public transport connections, employment and services in these settlements, a core principle of the Framework.
The expansion of the existing large villages to the south of the borough should have formed a strategic starting point for further growth in borough.
Considering historic trends, the larger villages have provided very little to meet the housing needs of the borough. The Council acknowledges10 that Green Belt boundaries have remained unchanged since 1993, however for the south of the borough that position dates back to 1979. The tables below illustrate how little new housing has been provided in the three southern villages in the period 2001 to 2011. This is despite the borough as a whole increasing its population by 13.3% in that same period.
Table 1 – Population increase/decrease 2001 - 201111
Settlement 2001 2011 Rise/Fall
Brookmans Park 3,600 3,561 -39
Welham Green 2,726 2,806 +80
Cuffley 4,306 4,282 -24
10 Please refer to page 4, Background in the Green Belt Topic Paper, TPA/2 11 SOURCE: WHBC SHMA (2014), Figure 4.1, page 48
6 Welwyn Hatfield Local Plan Stage 2 Hearing Statement – Aurora Properties (UK) Ltd
Table 2 - Number of New Dwellings 2001 to 201112
Settlement 2001 2011 Change
Brookmans Park 1,355 1,395 +40
Welham Green 1,255 1,311 +56
Cuffley 1,820 1,868 +48
There has been a reliance on the north of the borough to provide new homes and to meet the growth needs. The Council’s present strategy would continue this trend with settlements south of Hatfield only providing 1,011 homes over the plan period. This equates to just 54 dwellings per annum.
Brookmans Park and Cuffley are the two settlements with the most significant affordability issues. The Council’s proposed strategy will compound this problem.
The spatial strategy has not assessed how the growth of the larger villages would compare to the creation of new settlements. It is inconceivable that a new settlement without public transport connections and physical or social infrastructure would maintain the settlement pattern or be more sustainable than the existing large villages.
12 SOURCE: WHBC SHMA (2014), Figure 3.2, page 24
7 Welwyn Hatfield Local Plan Stage 2 Hearing Statement – Aurora Properties (UK) Ltd
5 Targets for Growth
Housing Targets Aurora’s previous submissions have identified significant concerns with the Council’s housing target. These concerns are found in section 3 of the Representation and paragraphs 6.4– 6.16 of the Stage 1 Hearing Statement.
At the Stage 1 hearing session the Council acknowledged that it was not providing an effective 15 year plan period, based on adoption in 2018, and that it would be appropriate to do so. As such, the plan period should be extended to 2033.
Appendix 4 contains a schedule of sites which were found suitable, available and deliverable from the Stage 2 HELAA and also found to be “Reasonable Alternatives” in the Sustainability Appraisal. These sites would add 1,846, or, potentially, 3,428 new dwellings (subject to deliverability of Hat2, Wel1, Wel2 and Wel15) in the borough. The housing target should be revised to include these sites.
The Council has moved the start period of the Local Plan forward from 2011 to 2013, which causes two lost years. 441 net new homes were delivered in 2011-201213. Using the latest annual need (800 dpa) this is a deficit of 1,159 homes, which should be in the housing target.
The extension of the Local Plan period to 2033 creates a FOAHN of 16,000 new homes. If the deficit from 2011-2012 is added the housing target is 17,159 homes.
To date the Council has delivered 1,057 homes from 2013–2016 (annual average of 352). This leaves a deficit of 16,102 homes to be delivered from 2017-2033 (1006 per annum).
Infrastructure Constraints The Council seeks to constrain housing development in Brookmans Park and Welham Green, based solely on primary school capacity. Aurora’s objection to this has been addressed in detail in the Representation (paragraphs 2.10-2.18 and Appendix 22), and the Stage 1 Hearing Statement (paragraphs 6.17 - 6.29).
The Council made no suggestion nor presented any evidence that school capacity would constrain housing delivery until its site allocations report (June 2016). In response Aurora submitted a detailed expert report (Appendix 5) to the Council on 11 July 201614, which explained how 768 new homes (the sum of BrP1, BrP4, BrP6 and BrP12, BrP13 and BrP14) could be delivered in Brookmans Park within the capacity of the existing primary school (refer to the letter in Appendix 6). The Council refused to engage with Aurora and refused to request HCC to assess the Aurora report, contrary to paragraphs 72 and 162 of the Framework and paragraph 6.19 of the Draft Infrastructure Delivery Plan.
Aurora maintains that there is no justification to restrict the allocation or delivery of new homes based on primary or secondary school capacity.
The Council’s preferred approach of leaving school provision and further site allocations to an early review is not necessary, rational or justified.
13 WHBC AMR 2015/2016, January 2017 14 Appendix 22 of the Representation
8 Welwyn Hatfield Local Plan Stage 2 Hearing Statement – Aurora Properties (UK) Ltd
6 Five Year Land Supply
The Council has back-loaded delivery of homes to the later years of the Local Plan. This is not a sound approach.
The Council relies on the delivery of three large sites from the middle to later years of the Plan. This presents a major risk to the overall housing delivery due to the foreseeable possibility for delay to these developments.
Paragraphs 4.8 to 4.46 of the Representation highlight a number of concerns regarding the delivery of HAT1/SDS5, HAT15/SDS6 and WGC5/SDS2. These concerns have been recognised by the Council although no evidence appears to have been presented to resolve them. These matters include the provision of substantial infrastructure, remediation and extraction of minerals. These are not quick or easy matters to resolve.
The Council’s use of a split trajectory is not sound. Paragraphs 3.8–3.16 of the Representation address this point. The approach will not significantly boost the supply of housing, and continues the significant under delivery against need whilst also compounding issues of affordability.
The approach to windfall housing is not sound. Paragraphs 3.21-3.29 of the Representation address this point. Relying on a relatively high level of windfall housing (over 10% of the Council’s overall housing target), in preference to the delivery of new homes in the large villages, is not positive or justified. Specifically, the Council’s proposal to double the windfall projection for the final five years of the plan period (paragraph 3.4.7 of the HELAA June 2016) is not justified.
Paragraph 47 does not support the Council’s position of delaying new homes until the backend of the plan period, whilst failing to allocate suitable sites that could specifically help to meet the five-year supply of housing.
The sites in the four large villages, which do not face delay due to infrastructure or mineral extraction, could all contribute towards the five-year land supply. All of these sites have been found “suitable, available and deliverable” in the Council’s HELAA and “reasonable alternatives” in the SA. There is no rational reason why these sites should not be allocated.
9 Welwyn Hatfield Local Plan Stage 2 Hearing Statement – Aurora Properties (UK) Ltd
7 Conclusions
The Council is not seeking to meet its FOAHN, despite the severe issues with housing need and affordability.
The Council’s Green Belt review has not been objective, it has sought to disproportionately protect the villages, whilst allocating less suitable and less sustainable alternatives.
The Council has not sought to create strong, long term and permanent Green Belt boundaries to endure beyond the Plan period, in accordance with paragraphs 83 and 85 of the Framework. Some allocations will breach existing strong and permanent Green Belt boundaries.
The approach to spatial distribution is flawed and does not give appropriate weight to the long term sustainable growth of the borough.
The spatial strategy will perpetuate issues of affordability in areas of greatest disparity.
The housing target is significantly below the FOAHN, and does not include the two ‘lost years’ in 2011 and 2012.
There is no sound justification to constrain growth due to a perceived lack of primary and secondary school capacity. The Council’s assessment is flawed and there is no merit in deferring these decisions to an early review of the Local Plan.
The Council is seeking to back-load housing delivery to later in the plan period, which presents considerable risk and does not accord with the objectives of paragraph 47 of the Framework. This approach will not help to alleviate issues with affordability in the borough.
Aurora reiterates the recommendations made in its Stage 1 Hearing Statement to make the plan sound through the examination process.
10 Welwyn Hatfield Local Plan Stage 2 Hearing Statement – Aurora Properties (UK) Ltd
Appendix 1: SHMA (2014) Figure 5.19
11 Figure 5.19 Affordability Ratio by Sub-Area August 2012 July 2013
Sub-Area Lower Quartile Lower Quartile Affordability Ratio House Price Income
Brookmans Park £465,000 £23,591 19.7
Cuffley £406,250 £24,236 16.8
Digswell £458,500 £28,420 16.1
Rural South £278,750 £21,916 12.7
Oaklands & Mardley Heath £355,500 £29,658 12.0
Welham Green £218,250 £18,203 12.0
Rural North £312,000 £27,502 11.3
Welwyn Hatfield HMA £206,000 £19,078 10.8
Welwyn £206,625 £19,610 10.5
Little Heath £221,500 £21,529 10.3
Welwyn Garden City £190,000 £18,685 10.2
Hatfield £170,000 £16,827 10.1
Welwyn Hatfield £190,000 £19,227 9.9
Woolmer Green £194,750 £22,277 8.7
Source: HM Land Registry, 2013, CACI, 2013
5.54 Based on this assessment, Brookmans Park has the most significant affordability challenges, with households requiring up to 20 times their annual income to access market housing. Properties in Cuffley and Digswell are also expensive, relative to lower quartile income. In contrast, Woolmer Green represents the most affordable location in which to purchase a home, with less extreme but still significant affordability challenges in Welwyn, Little Heath, Welwyn Garden City and Hatfield. In the case of the latter, the low house price is offset by the low average income, but households nevertheless would require the equivalent of 10 times their annual income to access housing at the lower end of the market far in excess of the affordability criteria introduced below. However, relative to the wider housing market area, it is evident that Welwyn Hatfield is slightly more affordable.
5.55 This should be considered in the context of benchmarks presented in the DCLG SHMA Guidance, where it is stated that a household should be considered able to buy a home if it costs 3.5 times the gross household income for a single earner household, or 2.9 times the gross household income for dual-income households48. Clearly, therefore, affordability represents a significant challenge in Welwyn Hatfield, with affordability ratios far surpassing this benchmark.
48 DCLG (2007) Strategic Housing Market Assessments Practice Guidance (p42)
104 Welwyn Hatfield Local Plan Stage 2 Hearing Statement – Aurora Properties (UK) Ltd
Appendix 2: Brookmans Park Historic Maps
12 Brookmans Park in 1920, prior to the construction of Brookmans Park railway station in 1928.
Brookmans Park 1920
Brookmans Park in 1970. Original roads are coloured red and new roads are coloured green. Development of the village occurred mainly in the period 1930 to 1960
Brookmans Park 1970 Welwyn Hatfield Local Plan Stage 2 Hearing Statement – Aurora Properties (UK) Ltd
Appendix 3: Housing Distribution, Coalescence &
Cumulative Impact Report
13
BrP12
Housing Distribution, Coalescence and Cumulative Impact Study for Brookmans Park, Welham Green, Little Heath and South Hatfield
THE BROOKMANS ESTATE BROOKMANS PARK
Aurora Properties (UK) Limited
Updated September 2016
Report updated September 2016
Since the report was first issued in May 2016, the following has happened or can be confirmed:
• The report was prepared to assess and review issues of housing distribution, coalescence and cumulative impact across the area, south of Hatfield in relation to BrP12 and other potential sites, subsequent to the Council’s publication of additional sites under consideration by WHBC. • We consider the report remains valid as written. The report has been submitted to the Council and the Council has been invited to comment on its specific findings. At the time of writing no comments have been raised by WHBC.
Housing Distribution, Coalescence and Cumulative Impact Study
South Hatfield, Welham Green, Brookmans Park and Little Heath, Hertfordshire
On behalf of Aurora Properties (UK) Ltd May 2016
Prepared by: Mark Flatman
Position: Director, Chartered Landscape Architect
Qualifications: CMLI, Dip LA, BA (Hons)
File name: 1573 Brookmans Cumulative Impact Study Date issued: 31 May 2016
Checked by: MF
Housing Distribution, Coalescence and Cumulative Impact Study – Brookmans Park
CONTENTS
1 INTRODUCTION 1
2 HOUSING DISTRIBUTION 3
3 GREEN BELT GAP FROM HATFIELD TO POTTERS BAR 5
4 SECOND TIER SETTLEMENTS 9
5 SITES IN WELHAM GREEN, BROOKMANS PARK AND LITTLE HEATH 13
6 SITE SELECTION 36
7 CUMULATIVE IMPACT 39
8 CONCLUSION 43
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A FIGURE 1: SITE ALLOCATIONS FIGURE 2: LANDSCAPE AND VISUAL CUMULATIVE EFFECTS PHOTOGRAPHIC SHEETS
APPENDIX B GOBIONS (GUBBINS) PARK - LIST ENTRY NO. 1000495, HISTORIC ENGLAND (2013) GOBIONS WOOD LEAFLET (EXTRACT) - HERTS AND MIDDLESEX WILDLIFE TRUST
1573 Brookmans Cumulative Impact Study Housing Distribution, Coalescence and Cumulative Impact Study – Brookmans Park 1
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Liz Lake Associates have been instructed by Aurora Properties (UK) Limited to undertake a coalescence and cumulative impact study for the area to the south of Hatfield, including the large villages of Welham Green and Brookmans Park and the small village of Little Heath. This report draws on the expertise and contributions of the team appointed by Aurora Properties (UK) Limited to address the various planning, environmental and other technical issues associated with potential site allocations within the Borough.
1.2 Welwyn Hatfield Borough Council has an objectively assessed housing need (OAN) at the higher end of the range 664 to 707 new dwellings per annum (updated SHMA October 2015), which would amount to 13,280 to 14,140 over the 20 year plan period.
1.3 The Office for National Statistics has assessed the housing need in the borough to be 14,400 new dwellings over a 20 year period. The updated SHMA is therefore broadly consistent with the ONS housing projections.
1.4 The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) states at paragraphs 14 and 47 that the Local Plan should meet the full objectively assessed need (OAN) (sometimes also known as FOAN), with sufficient flexibility to adapt to rapid change unless the adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits when assessed against the policies in the Framework taken as a whole.
1.5 Examples of adverse impacts that should be taken into consideration are listed in footnote 9 in the NPPF (page 4), which include sites protected under Birds and Habitats Directives, Sites of Special Scientific Interest, land designated as Green Belt, Local Green Spaces, an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, Heritage Assets and locations at risk of flooding.
1.6 The most relevant objectives in the NPPF to achieve new housing through the Local Plan are:
1573 Brookmans Cumulative Impact Study Housing Distribution, Coalescence and Cumulative Impact Study – Brookmans Park 2
A) To boost significantly the supply of housing;
B) To encourage sustainable development which achieves economic, social and environmental benefits;
C) To meet the OAN in full unless adverse impacts would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits;
D) That the Plan should be the most appropriate strategy;
E) That the Plan should be “sound”, such that it is positive, justified and effective.
1.7 In order to meet its OAN, Welwyn Hatfield Borough Council (WHBC) has acknowledged that “exceptional circumstances” do exist (paragraph 3.6 – Local Plan Consultation Document – January 2015) to release some land from the Green Belt in order to meet its OAN.
1.8 In the light of the decision that exceptional circumstances do exist, the burden falls upon the Council, in accordance with paragraph 14 of the NPPF, to (i) examine the sustainability and suitability of each individual site, (ii) identify whether any adverse impacts would “significantly and demonstrably” outweigh the benefits of allocating that site and (iii) weigh the adverse impacts against the benefits of meeting the OAN in full. These three stages should be addressed sequentially, with the balance in favour of sustainable development.
1.9 The purpose of this report is to examine whether the allocation of multiple sites to the south of Hatfield, Welham Green, Brookmans Park and Little Heath would amount to cumulative adverse impacts (i.e. greater harm) and, if so, whether those adverse impacts would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits of meeting the Council’s OAN in full.
1573 Brookmans Cumulative Impact Study Housing Distribution, Coalescence and Cumulative Impact Study – Brookmans Park 3
2 HOUSING DISTRIBUTION
2.1 On 25 September 2014 the Council prepared a report (Local Plan Update) which included an assessment (paragraph 9.11 Table 1) of proportional distribution of new housing throughout the borough, based on the (now superseded) OAN of 12,500 new dwellings over the 20 year plan period. Adopting the Council’s criteria and the updated Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA), the OAN for the proportional distribution of 14,140 new dwellings would be:
Table 1 Location % of all Proportional OAN Households (14,140) Distribution Towns Welwyn Garden City 44.7% 6,320 Hatfield 30.5% 4,313 Large Villages Brookmans Park 3.3% 467 Welham Green 2.9% 410 Welwyn 3.4% 480 Cuffley 4.0% 565 Small Villages Digswell 1.4% 198 Woolmer Green 1.3% 184 Oaklands and Mardley Heath 2.7% 382 Little Heath 1.0% 141 Rural 4.8% 680 Total 100% 14,140
2.2 In the Council’s Local Plan Update on 25 September 2014, the Council recognised at paragraph 9.17:
“The results of the SHMA have indicated that between the two censuses some villages have suffered from depopulation or remaining largely static. Given the scale of the need for housing; the fact that there are suitable locations in sustainable locations around the excluded villages; and the requirement to ‘leave no stone unturned’ in meeting the need for housing, it would seem prudent to explore the
1573 Brookmans Cumulative Impact Study Housing Distribution, Coalescence and Cumulative Impact Study – Brookmans Park 4
potential for a strategy based on a more proportionate approach to delivery of housing.”
2.3 The Council officers also reported at paragraph 9.19:
“…some settlements may have to take a larger share than would be proportionate where the scale of development would not result in an unsustainable pattern of development and where there are no other constraints or adverse impacts that are not outweighed by the need to allocate land for housing.”
2.4 Some of the small villages in the borough do not have any suitable sites for major development. For example, Digswell is a small village to the north of the borough which does not have any major sites which are suitable, available and deliverable. Also, Little Heath is a small village to the south of the borough which is not a sustainable location for major development. As a result, unless the Council decides that the need to meet its OAN outweighs the adverse impacts in these locations, the 198 new dwellings that would be required in Digswell and the majority of the 141 new dwellings that would be required in Little Heath will need to be located elsewhere in the borough, including the large excluded villages.
2.5 In comparison, the large villages to the south of the borough, being Brookmans Park, Welham Green and Cuffley all have a high level of public transport accessibility. They each have a railway station, each have bus services, each have significant provision of village shops and services and other facilities. This makes these three large villages more sustainable and suitable to accommodate new housing. These are the large villages referred to by the planning officers is in paragraphs 9.17 and 9.19 of their report dated 25 September 2014.
2.6 For the reasons stated by the Council’s planning officers in 2.2 and 2.3 above, it will be reasonable and appropriate for the sustainable locations of Brookmans Park, Welham Green and Cuffley to seek to meet at least, if not more than, the proportional distribution of new dwellings, subject to the identification of sites which are suitable, available and deliverable.
1573 Brookmans Cumulative Impact Study Housing Distribution, Coalescence and Cumulative Impact Study – Brookmans Park 5
3 GREEN BELT GAP FROM HATFIELD TO POTTERS BAR
3.1 Map 1 below shows the gap between the 1st Tier settlements of Hatfield and Potters Bar and the narrow gap between south Hatfield and Welham Green. The most fragile section, between south Hatfield and Welham Green is coloured pink. The area coloured pink and orange, from south Hatfield to Potters Bar, is 4.75km from north to south and is contained by the A1M to the west and the East Coast Mainline Railway (ECML) to the east.
3.2 The borough’s administrative boundary with Hertsmere is located in the southern part of the area coloured orange – see map below.
1573 Brookmans Cumulative Impact Study Housing Distribution, Coalescence and Cumulative Impact Study – Brookmans Park 6
MAP 1
1573 Brookmans Cumulative Impact Study Housing Distribution, Coalescence and Cumulative Impact Study – Brookmans Park 7
3.3 In November 2013, WHBC instructed SKM to undertake a strategic Green Belt Review Purposes Assessment in partnership with Dacorum Borough Council and St Albans City and District Council.
3.4 For reasons that SKM do not explain, it divided the strategic gap between Hatfield and the southern administrative boundary (between WHBC and Hertsmere) into two parcels (GB48 and GB50) and it failed to fully assess the land south of GB50, which is in Hertsmere. This omission was further compounded by SKM seeking to combine GB48 and GB50 (to the west of the ECML) with GB45 (to the east of the ECML) for the purposes of its assessment of separation between the 1st Tier settlements of Hatfield and Potters Bar. GB45 is to the east of the ECML and, in comparison to GB48 and GB50, does not perform any significant Green Belt purpose in preventing Hatfield and Potters Bar from merging.
3.5 The fragility of the gap between Hatfield and Potters Bar (GB48, GB50 and the land to the south of the administrative boundary) becomes even more significant when the strategic gap is viewed as one parcel, with Welham Green jutting into that parcel to the north, the Royal Veterinary College (RVC) sitting in the centre (shaded green on Map 1, which is identified as a Major Developed Site in the Green Belt - Policy RA6 in the Adopted Local Plan 2005) and the recently approved Solar Farm in Hertsmere, to the south of the RVC, as shown on Map 1. Indeed, any development to the north of Welham Green would merge that village with Hatfield and any major development to the south of Welham Green would harm the open countryside between Welham Green, the RVC and Potters Bar.
3.6 In the planning officers’ Local Plan Update presented to the Cabinet Housing and Planning Panel (CHPP) on 15 October 2014, the planning officers recognise, at paragraph 9.19, that the strategic gap between Hatfield and Potters Bar is sensitive to cumulative impact:
“9.19…….The two Strategic gaps in question are between Hatfield and Potters Bar and between Welwyn Garden City and Stevenage. Whilst the release of an individual site in one of these strategic gaps would only have a partial impact, it is clear that the release of several such sites at once could have a cumulative impact that would be significant within those strategic gaps with the potential for the gap to become very fragile indeed.”
1573 Brookmans Cumulative Impact Study Housing Distribution, Coalescence and Cumulative Impact Study – Brookmans Park 8
3.7 Map 1 above illustrates the fragility of the narrow and sensitive gap to the west of the ECML.
3.8 Brookmans Park is entirely located to the east of the ECML. The distance, from the closest point of Welwyn Garden City to Brookmans Park is 6km. Hatfield sits to the northwest of Brookmans Park, mostly to the west of the ECML.
1573 Brookmans Cumulative Impact Study Housing Distribution, Coalescence and Cumulative Impact Study – Brookmans Park 9
4 SECOND TIER SETTLEMENTS
4.1 Brookmans Park and Welham Green are 2nd Tier settlements.
4.2 The material separation from Brookmans Park to Welham Green is 705 metres (see Map 2). However, Brookmans Park lies to the east of the ECML and Welham Green is to the west of the ECML. The elevated railway line embankment and the well- established woodlands (Peplins Wood) create a strong physical and visual barrier between Brookmans Park and Welham Green. The two settlements are therefore significantly separated from each other not only by distance, but also by intervening physical features, which provide no perception of the existing gap or any inter-visibility between the two settlements.
MAP 2
1573 Brookmans Cumulative Impact Study Housing Distribution, Coalescence and Cumulative Impact Study – Brookmans Park 10
4.3 Little Heath is a small village on the administrative boundary with Hertsmere, to the north of Potters Bar, which is physically attached to Potters Bar and relies on that town for most of its services, facilities and amenities.
4.4 Swanley Bar is a hamlet 1.2km to the south of Brookmans Park, adjacent to Little Heath, which is washed over within the Green Belt. Swanley Bar is separated from Little Heath and Potters Bar, but only by a very narrow wedge to the east of Hawkshead Road. The gap between Little Heath and Swanley Bar is extremely fragile.
4.5 The landscape setting between Brookmans Park and Potters Bar is open and exposed countryside in an elevated position with significant local, medium and long- range views (including wide open panoramic views) to and from numerous receptors, as well as the registered heritage asset of Gobions Historic Park and Gardens. As a result, the southern gap between Brookmans Park and Potters Bar is significantly more fragile and sensitive to change than the area to the north of Brookmans Park. The fragility of the landscape in this area is recognised in the Council’s own Sensitivity and Capacity Assessments (2012), which concluded that all those sites assessed within the strategic gap between Brookmans Park and Potters Bar (ie west of ECML; forming WBP1, 2, 3, 4, and 5) were judged by the Council as having a Low Capacity to accommodate any housing (on account of these critical landscape, heritage and environmental factors).
1573 Brookmans Cumulative Impact Study Housing Distribution, Coalescence and Cumulative Impact Study – Brookmans Park 11
WHBC – BROAD LOCATION H – LANDSCAPE SENSITIVITY AND CAPACITY STUDY 2012
1573 Brookmans Cumulative Impact Study Housing Distribution, Coalescence and Cumulative Impact Study – Brookmans Park 12
4.6 Similarly, south of Brookmans Park, all land between Brookmans Park and Potters Bar, with the exception of SBP2 was assessed as being of Low Capacity (SBP1, 3, 4, 5, and 6) to accommodate housing, although the errors and omissions in assessing SBP2 mean that it too should have scored Low.
4.7 For SBP2 (part of which was subsequently designated BrP7), the Council’s scores for Landscape Sensitivity and Landscape Value should have recognised the following attributes, in addition to the acknowledgment of the site’s elevation and openness, coupled with expansive short, medium and long range views:
• The Landscape Sensitivity did not acknowledge the Historic Landscape contribution or Cultural Sensitivity, which should have acknowledged the presence of tree, hedgerow and copse features on land that is predominantly grazing land and still today forms part of the setting of Gobions Historic Park and Gardens.
• For Landscape Value, the adjacency of Folly Arch, a Grade II Listed Building is within the immediate setting of SBP2 (BrP7). The trees and copses within SBP2 (BrP7) still form an important backdrop to views of the Folly Arch from the ancient track (public footpath) within Gobions Historic Park and Gardens (see Appendix B).
• The strong Cultural Associations with the landscape and its relationship to Gobions Historic Park and Gardens contribute to raise the landscape value to a High level. This requires the reassessment of SBP2 (BrP7) to a “Low Capacity within the landscape”.
1573 Brookmans Cumulative Impact Study Housing Distribution, Coalescence and Cumulative Impact Study – Brookmans Park 13
5 SITES IN WELHAM GREEN, BROOKMANS PARK AND LITTLE HEATH
5.1 Map 3 below shows the location of all potentially suitable sites in south Hatfield, Welham Green, Brookmans Park and Little Heath which have been advanced by landowners or developers.
MAP 3
1573 Brookmans Cumulative Impact Study Housing Distribution, Coalescence and Cumulative Impact Study – Brookmans Park 14
5.2 Sites to the west of the ECML in the fragile gap between Hatfield and Potters Bar are coloured pink. Sites to the east of the ECML are coloured green.
5.3 Table 2 below shows approximately how many new homes would be built in each of these locations if all of these major sites were allocated for development. The Table is divided between the west side of the ECML and the east side of the ECML.
Table 2
Site Identity West of ECML East of ECML (WHBC SHLAA (WHBC SHLAA 2014 2014 Assessment) Assessment) Hat11 150 WeG1 and 2 25 WeG3 45 WeG6 70 WeG8 325 WeG10 120 WeG12 65 WeG15 175 BrP4 300 WeG4a 120 BrP1 100 BrP6 170 BrP7 (extended site) 195 BrP9 190 BrP10 120 BrP12 100* BrP13 5** BrP14 5** LHe1 35 Total 1275 1040 *The Capacity for development on BrP12 is greater than that which is indicated in the Updated SHLAA December 2014 due to the detailed Transport Assessment which has been approved by Hertfordshire County Council.
**The capacity for development on BrP13 and BrP14 is smaller than that which is indicated in the Updated SHLAA December 2014.
5.4 Should the Council decide that the cumulative impact of development in south Hatfield, Welham Green, Brookmans Park and Little Heath is such that the adverse impacts might significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, it would be
1573 Brookmans Cumulative Impact Study Housing Distribution, Coalescence and Cumulative Impact Study – Brookmans Park 15
necessary to examine the sustainability of each settlement and to then assess the merits of each site within that settlement, to weigh the significance of any cumulative impact. This would be a three-step approach: (i) Sustainability of Location, (ii) Suitability of Individual Sites and (iii) Environmental and Landscape impact.
(i) Sustainability of Location
5.5 Brookmans Park is an established village. It has a large railway station with direct access to all four railway tracks, allowing fast and slow train services to stop. There is a 1.5 form entry primary school (with opportunity to be expanded to 2 form entry) and a secondary school within the village. The village has 40 shop units set around a village green providing a wide range of convenience goods and services, including a post office, pharmacy and library. The village has a pub and a range of bars and restaurants. There is significant employment in Brookmans Park (The Royal Veterinary College, The Transmitting and Satellite Station, the two schools, the shops and the well-established golf club). All of the services, facilities and amenities in Brookmans Park are within walking distance of the village green and the railway station.
5.6 Welham Green has a railway station with single platforms for slow services to the north and south. The platforms are narrow and capacity is limited. There are bus services through Welham Green with connections to surrounding towns and villages. The village has a one-form primary school, with no opportunity for expansion on the existing site. Welham Green has a good range of local shops and services and petrol filling station and garage which offers a motorcar repair and MOT services. There are two pubs in Welham Green, one of which (The Hope & Anchor) is a Grade II Listed building. There is a substantial employment area in Welham Green, adjacent to the ECML, which provides mostly industrial and warehouse uses. All of the services, facilities and amenities in Welham Green are within walking distance of the village and the railway station.
5.7 Little Heath has a one-form entry primary school and Mount Grace Secondary School within walking distance of the village. Lochinver House School (aged 4 to 13) which is a private fee paying school, is also within walking distance. There are bus services through Little Heath to Potters Bar, Brookmans Park and other local towns and villages. There are no shops or other services or amenities in Little Heath. Potters
1573 Brookmans Cumulative Impact Study Housing Distribution, Coalescence and Cumulative Impact Study – Brookmans Park 16
Bar railway station is approximately 1.6km from Little Heath which offers fast and slow train services to London and to other towns along the ECML. In most respects, Little Heath is a car dependent community which relies almost entirely on Potters Bar for its services, facilities and amenities.
5.8 South of Hatfield (HAT11 and WeG8) is significantly divorced from any of the services, amenities and facilities in Hatfield. The A1001 is a strong and permanent Green Belt boundary with significant landscaping. As such, the A1001 was deliberately designed to be the southern edge of Hatfield. Breaching that gap, to develop HAT11 and/or WeG8 would create a new settlement with no local services in a remote and an isolated location. There are bus services along the A1001, but in most other respects this area of south Hatfield is not a sustainable location.
5.9 When comparing the sustainability of the four aforementioned locations, Brookmans Park is the most sustainable location for new housing, followed by Welham Green. South Hatfield and Little Heath are both unsustainable locations for any significant additional housing.
(ii) Suitability of Individual Sites
5.10 The assessments below consider site suitability and potential coalescence of the areas from the south of Hatfield to Potters Bar, including the large villages of Brookmans Park and Welham Green and the small village of Little Heath. Cumulative impact from multiple site allocations is considered later in this report.
5.11 South Hatfield
A) Hat11 (150 dwellings) and WeG8 (325 dwellings)
Both of these sites would be to the south of the A1001 (South Way), which is a strong, defensible and permanent Green Belt boundary. Both sites are on elevated land and open countryside with weak Green Belt boundaries. The A1001 and the substantial landscaping along that road provide a strongly contained southern boundary to the conurbation of Hatfield and beyond this there are high levels of visual openness generally in this location, as identified in WHBC’s Stage 1 Green Belt Purposes assessment, carried out by SKM. In addition, the SKM assessment of GB48 stated that the northern part of the area, where these parcels are sited,
1573 Brookmans Cumulative Impact Study Housing Distribution, Coalescence and Cumulative Impact Study – Brookmans Park 17
“provides historic setting of Old Hatfield Conservation Area and the Hatfield House Historic Park and Garden. There is clear inter-visibility from the Green Belt”.
SOUTH WAY (A1001)
Assessment
The development of either or both Hat11 and WeG8 would breach a strong and permanent Green Belt boundary which performs a clear purpose to separate Hatfield from Welham Green and Potters Bar. Development would significantly and demonstrably reduce the fragile gap between Hatfield and Welham Green and would result in coalescence and merging between Hatfield and Welham Green, compromising the separation of the settlements in physical and visual terms (loss of openness) within this identified Primary Local Gap. In addition, the contribution each parcel makes to the strategic gap between Hatfield and Potters Bar would be reduced.
Hat11 and WeG8 are remote and isolated sites with no local services, amenities or facilities.
Hat11 and WeG8 are both on elevated and open countryside with wide panoramic views to and from numerous public receptors.
The SHLAA 2012 did not include Hat11. The SHLAA 2012 assessment of WeG8 found that it was unsuitable for development. The SHLAA update in 2014 stated that WeG8 had been withdrawn. Hat11 was found unsuitable.
Hat11 and WeG8 are not suitable for allocation.
1573 Brookmans Cumulative Impact Study Housing Distribution, Coalescence and Cumulative Impact Study – Brookmans Park 18
5.12 Welham Green
A) WeG1 and WeG2 (25 dwellings)
WeG1 and WeG2 are two small sites each being 0.4ha/1 acre with a combined estimated capacity (SHLAA 2014) for 25 new homes.
Assessment
WeG1 and WeG2 both face into open countryside but, due to the small size of each site and the close proximity to the urban area of Welham Green, development is unlikely to have a significant adverse impact.
B) WeG3 (45 dwellings)
WeG3 faces into open countryside and has weak Green Belt boundaries to the south and west.
Assessment
Due to the small size of WeG3 and the close proximity to the urban area of Welham Green, development is unlikely to have a significant adverse impact.
C) WeG4a (120 dwellings)
The promotion of WeG4a (Marshmoor) for housing development is linked to the proposed employment area on the larger site to the east of the ECML. The housing is therefore dependent on the whole site being released from the Green Belt. The site has strong Green Belt boundaries and is not exposed to open countryside. The close proximity of the railway station and local employment is a benefit.
Assessment
As part of the larger proposal for development on Marshmoor, WeG4a is unlikely to have a significant adverse impact.
1573 Brookmans Cumulative Impact Study Housing Distribution, Coalescence and Cumulative Impact Study – Brookmans Park 19
D) WeG6 (70 dwellings)
The East Coast mainline railway runs along the eastern boundary of WeG6 in an elevated and exposed location. This would cause serious visual and noise impact. The site is partially within Flood Zone 3 and in close proximity to the SSSI (Swallow Holes). There are two listed buildings set in the middle of the site, which are heritage assets. The setting of the listed buildings within an open landscape should be preserved. Bulls Lane has a highway constraint adjacent to WeG6 where the road narrows to a single carriageway under the ECML railway bridge.
Assessment
There are serious planning, environmental and heritage issues on WeG6 that would amount to significant and demonstrable adverse impacts.
WeG6 should not be allocated for development.
E) WeG10 (120 dwellings)
WeG10 extends beyond the existing boundary of Welham Green, to the west, into open countryside. However, the site boundaries to the north, east and south are all strong.
Assessment
WeG10 is unlikely to have any significant adverse impacts that would outweigh the need for housing.
F) WeG12
WeG12 is a newly promoted site which is located in the fragile gap between south Hatfield and Welham Green. However, due to the topography of the landscape, there are only limited views toward the north.
The site is well-connected to the village of Welham Green within walking distance of the existing primary school, the local shops and services and the railway station.
1573 Brookmans Cumulative Impact Study Housing Distribution, Coalescence and Cumulative Impact Study – Brookmans Park 20
The area to the east of the site is developed as an industrial employment area, which extends further to the north. Green Belt boundaries to the east and south are strong. Green belt boundaries to the north and west are weak.
Assessment
Whilst WeG12 is within the narrow and fragile gap between south Hatfield and Welham Green, which makes the decision for site allocation marginal, the development of this site would not have any significant or demonstrable adverse impacts provided WeG8 and Hat11 are not allocated.
G) WeG15 (175 dwellings)
WeG15 is a newly promoted site which has not been assessed in the Council’s previous SHLAA documents. The site faces out into open countryside from an exposed and elevated position with a high level of visual openness in the landscape and extensive panoramic views arcing from west to southeast. Green Belt boundaries to the south and east are very weak and the site displays a high level of visual openness. The SSSI (Swallow Holes) is adjacent, to the south.
Assessment
The significant and demonstrable adverse impacts weigh heavily against the suitability of this site. Development on this site would be a marginal decision, which would only be relevant in future if the housing need cannot be met on more suitable sites within the borough.
5.13 Brookmans Park
A) BrP1 (100 dwellings)
BrP1 is a self-contained site to the north of Brookmans Park. The site has strong and permanent Green Belt boundaries on all sides and is influenced by the surrounding urban area and existing built form to the north, south, east and west of the site, including the A1000 (Great North Road) which provides a particularly strong boundary to the settlement. The site is not exposed to open countryside. The site is
1573 Brookmans Cumulative Impact Study Housing Distribution, Coalescence and Cumulative Impact Study – Brookmans Park 21
regarded as “urban” in the Hertfordshire County Council Landscape Character Assessment.
The existing Green Belt boundary to the south of BrP1 is not contiguous with the existing boundary. However, all of the land between the existing Green Belt boundary and BrP1 is already developed with residential properties and the land serves no Green Belt purpose. If it had not already been developed, that land would have been included within BrP1, thus making the boundary contiguous.
The proposed new Green Belt boundary is strong and permanent as shown on the Green Belt Site Plan below.
GREEN BELT SITE PLAN - BrP1
1573 Brookmans Cumulative Impact Study Housing Distribution, Coalescence and Cumulative Impact Study – Brookmans Park 22
The proposal to link BrP1 and the whole of Bell Bar to Brookmans Park by a new public footpath and cycleway will provide a convenient green link to the railway station, the primary school, the local shops, services and facilities.
BrP1 is a sustainable site with a local shop, petrol station, pub, restaurant, garden centre (with greengrocer and café), golf club and the local secondary school (Chancellors School) all within walking distance of the site.
Assessment
The development of BrP1 would not have any significant adverse impacts. The site has no inter-visibility with any other proposed site allocation and therefore no harmful cumulative landscape or visual impacts exist.
B) BrP4 (300 dwellings)
BrP4 is to the west of the East Coast Mainline railway, which is a strong and permanent Green Belt boundary. The site is in open countryside with a weak Green Belt boundary to the south. The Raybrook flows through part of the site, in Flood Zone 3, towards the SSSI (Swallow Holes). There are potential highway issues which would be difficult and impractical to resolve, including the possible need for a new vehicular and pedestrian bridge over the ECML. It would also be necessary to upgrade the single-track country lane (Bradmore Lane) and the bridge over the Mimmshall Brook at Water End. The country lanes in Water End are narrow and subject to flood control gates which can be closed by the Environment Agency to protect the existing homes in the hamlet of Water End. There are five listed buildings in Water End. The necessary road improvements to Bradmore Lane and Warrengate Road would change the character of Water End and harm the setting of its heritage assets. Development of BrP4 has the potential to cause environmental and ecological harm to the SSSI. BrP4 lies outside the existing village of Brookmans Park, being sited west of the settlement across the major ECML railway lines and Station Road. This would create a new settlement, which would be divorced from the existing village. It would also need to take into account noise attenuation and visual impact from the railway, pushing any development edge further away from the village, so it would not be connected.
1573 Brookmans Cumulative Impact Study Housing Distribution, Coalescence and Cumulative Impact Study – Brookmans Park 23
In its Background Housing Paper (Part 2 Distribution Options) September 2012, the Council reported (page 35):
“The area to the west would be separated from the rest of the village by the railway and only accessible via a narrow road over a bridge on a tight bend…….Development to the west of the railway line would result in urban encroachment into the countryside and have a significant impact on openness.”
The Council concluded its own assessment of BrP4, with the following statement in bold, with underline:
“The area to the west of the railway line is not considered suitable to take forward as a village extension.”
Assessment
BrP4 would have significant and demonstrable adverse impacts across a wide range of planning, landscape, environmental and highway issues.
BrP4 is within the fragile Green Belt Gap between Hatfield, Welham Green and Potters Bar, as identified by the planning officers at paragraph 9.19 of their report to the Cabinet Housing and Planning Panel (CHPP) on 15 October 2014 (see paragraph 3.6 above).
Given the very strong adverse impacts that were identified and reported by the Council’s planning officers in the Background Housing Paper, September 2012, the SHLAA October 2012 (sites outside urban areas) correctly sieved BrP4 out and the site was found unsuitable, mainly because of its location to the west of the ECML railway. In the SHLAA update in 2014, BrP4 was again found unsuitable due to the weak Green Belt boundary and the substantial highways works for vehicles and pedestrians.
The development of BrP4 would create a new settlement which is physically separated from the existing village of Brookmans Park by the very strong ECML Green Belt boundary. This would have adverse social as well as planning and environmental consequences.
BrP4 is not suitable for allocation.
1573 Brookmans Cumulative Impact Study Housing Distribution, Coalescence and Cumulative Impact Study – Brookmans Park 24
C) BrP6 (170 dwellings)
BrP6 is to the south of Brookmans Park within the gap between Brookmans Park and Potters Bar (see Map 1). The site is adjacent to the main through-route, Bluebridge Road. The site has strong Green Belt boundaries but it is in an elevated and exposed location, which dominates the existing settlement. The site is also exposed to noise and visual impact from the adjacent ECML railway. The perceived scale of Brookmans Park would be significantly increased when viewed from the road and rail transport corridors. Part of the site is in Flood Zone 3. The site is presently used to grow food produce for consumption by animals at the RVC. The whole of BrP6 is within walking distance of the village green and the railway station.
Assessment
Notwithstanding the adverse impacts associated with the development of BrP6, the close proximity of services and transport would be a benefit. Therefore, on balance, the site is considered suitable for allocation in order to assist in meeting the OAN.
D) BrP9 (190 dwellings) and BrP10 (120 dwellings)
These two sites are assessed separately in the SHLAA 2014 but for current purposes the two sites need to be considered together. This is because BrP9 would be isolated from the village of Brookmans Park unless BrP10 is developed.
It is highly improbable that either BrP9 and/or BrP10 would be suitable for development unless BrP6 is developed, in which case there might be some positive attributes to the development of BrP10, but not BrP9.
BrP9 and BrP10 are both located in the narrow Green Belt gap to the south of Brookmans Park. BrP10 is shielded from significant visual impact by mature hedges and trees along its eastern and northern boundary but BrP9 is more exposed, particularly when viewed from the south. Like BrP6, the development of BrP10 would perceptively increase the scale of Brookmans Park from the main highway through the village, but it would not be exposed to noise or visual impact from the ECML. The whole of BrP10 is within walking distance of the village green and the railway station.
1573 Brookmans Cumulative Impact Study Housing Distribution, Coalescence and Cumulative Impact Study – Brookmans Park 25
BrP9 presents greater adverse impacts and increases the potential coalescence between Brookmans Park and Potters Bar.
Assessment
Subject to the balance of housing need, BrP10 might be considered for development as part of a future plan period, but only if BrP6 has been developed. This is a marginal decision, which would only be relevant in future if the housing need cannot be met on more suitable sites within the borough.
BrP9 is not suitable for allocation.
E) BrP12 (100 dwellings, two-form primary school, scout hut and care home)
BrP12 is to the north of Brookmans Park. The site has strong Green Belt boundaries and visual containment. There is only one longer view out from within the site towards the southwest, and there is no inter-visibility with any other proposed site allocation. It should be noted that the view is a private view from the land and there are no publicly accessible views from the site. The site would have a very limited visual impact on Brookmans Park or the wider area, would not alter the perceived scale of Brookmans Park and would not be visible from any of the transport corridors. The proposal to build a new two-form primary school on the site, together with a new scout hut, would provide substantial community benefits. A new care home would be built on the site of the existing primary school. The whole site is within walking distance of the village centre and the railway station. The site would also be linked to Bell Bar and to BrP1 by a new dedicated public footpath and cycleway, which would provide a new green route to and from the centre of Brookmans Park.
Assessment
BrP12 is a suitable, available and deliverable site for new housing in the sustainable village of Brookmans Park. The new footpath and cycleway between Bell Bar and Brookmans Park, the creation of public open space, management of the ancient woodlands and ponds, the community facilities and the environmental and ecological enhancements are all positive benefits.
There are no significant adverse impacts associated with this site.
1573 Brookmans Cumulative Impact Study Housing Distribution, Coalescence and Cumulative Impact Study – Brookmans Park 26
F) BrP13 (5 dwellings)
BrP13 is a small site forming part of Brookmans Park Golf Club, adjacent to the existing village. Whilst the SHLAA 2014 identifies the site to be 0.7ha/1.75 acres, that includes a substantial area of mature trees, including oak trees that are several hundred years old. The net area available for development is 0.4 ha/1 acre. Also, due to the character of the surrounding dwellings (large detached homes), the site would not accommodate the 30 dwellings stated in the SHLAA 2014. A more realistic assessment of capacity would be 5 detached dwellings. It might be possible to build apartments on the site, to a higher density, but this would be subject to design considerations. There are also highway capacity issues which are further complicated by the private ownership of Golf Club Road, which is the only highway access to the site. The site also occupies a very prominent location at a high point in Brookmans Park. Visual impact over the golf course and the wider countryside will also be material considerations.
Assessment
Due to its small size, development of BrP13 is unlikely to have any significant adverse impacts.
G) BrP14 (5 dwellings)
BrP14 is a small site to the rear of Georges Wood Road, with highway access from Golf Club Road. The site comprises 0.5ha/1.25 acres but, like BrP13, the development of the site would be constrained by existing mature trees. The net area for development would be 0.4ha/1 acre and, for the same reasons as BrP13, the site would realistically accommodate 5 new detached dwellings. BrP14 is not exposed to open countryside or to prominent views over the golf course, therefore visual impact would not be a major consideration.
Assessment
Due to its small size, development of BrP14 is unlikely to have any significant adverse impacts.
1573 Brookmans Cumulative Impact Study Housing Distribution, Coalescence and Cumulative Impact Study – Brookmans Park 27
5.14 Little Heath
A) BrP7 (195 dwellings – Extended Site)
BrP7 is not in Brookmans Park and it is unclear why the Council has used a “BrP” designation for one site in Little Heath whilst using a “LHe” designation for the other site in Little Heath.
BrP7 is, in fact, located to the north of Little Heath, adjacent to Potters Bar and in close proximity to Swanley Bar. The site would rely on Potters Bar (Hertsmere) to provide the majority of services, amenities and infrastructure.
BrP7 is at a high point in the borough (the site rises to approximately 120m AOD) with extensive and exposed open panoramic views across the countryside, particularly to the northwest, the west and the southwest. The Green Belt boundaries to the north and west are very weak. The development of this site would cause coalescence between Potters Bar and Brookmans Park, particularly if BrP6 and/or BrP10 were also developed.
Little Heath is not a sustainable location, with no local shops or services. As such, BrP7 would be largely car dependent.
The adjoining hamlet of Swanley Bar is washed over by the Green Belt. The gap between Swanley Bar, Little Heath and Potters Bar is exceptionally fragile, being a thin wedge of land to the east of Hawkshead Road. The development of BrP7 would overwhelm Swanley Bar to such an extent that it would effectively become merged with the conurbation of Potters Bar.
BrP7 is also in close proximity to the Grade II Listed Heritage Asset, Folly Arch at Gobions Park, which is visible from numerous receptors, due to its prominent location at the high point in the landscape. The Folly Arch (a gothic gate tower designed by James Gibbs) was designed as a prominent eye-catcher in skyline views from within the park and is the focal point for one of the main vistas or ‘allees’. Because the landform continues to rise to the south, it is likely that new housing associated with BrP7 would erode these skyline views towards Folly Arch from within the Historic Park
1573 Brookmans Cumulative Impact Study Housing Distribution, Coalescence and Cumulative Impact Study – Brookmans Park 28
and Gardens, causing harm to the setting and significance of the heritage asset (see extract at Appendix B).
Assessment
BrP7 would have significant and demonstrable adverse impacts across a wide range of planning, landscape, environmental and sustainability issues. Indeed, this site was considered so unsuitable that it was correctly sieved out of the SHLAA 2012 at Stage 1. In the 2014 SHLAA update, BrP7 was unexpectedly found to be suitable. The reasons for this change of outcome between 2012 and 2014 are not clear.
BrP7 is not suitable for allocation.
B) LHe 1 (35 Dwellings)
LHe1 is a small site to the northeast of Hawkshead Road which is in open countryside. It would rely on Potters Bar for all of its services, amenities and infrastructure. The site is not in a sustainable location and would be largely car dependent.
Assessment
Due to its relatively small size of this site and having proper regard to the need for new homes in the borough, the development of LHe1 is unlikely to have any significant adverse impacts that would outweigh the need for housing.
(iii) Environmental Impact
This section should be read in conjunction with Figure 1: Site Allocations and Figure 2: Landscape and Visual Cumulative Effects Photographic Sheets (Appendix A).
Having assessed the sites on Map 3 (Table 2) in respect of sustainability and suitability, it is also important to consider how clusters of development might cause landscape, visual or environmental impact.
1573 Brookmans Cumulative Impact Study Housing Distribution, Coalescence and Cumulative Impact Study – Brookmans Park 29
5.15 This section of the report does not seek to provide a full environmental impact assessment, but seeks to examine the immediate physical, social and environmental impacts, including the landscape and visual impacts. All sites listed in Table 2 as shown on Map 3 are considered in this section, which is divided between sites in south Hatfield, Welham Green, Brookmans Park and Little Heath.
South Hatfield – Hat11, WeG8.
5.16 The individual or combined effects of development of one or both of these parcels, along with WeG12, would cause significant and irreversible cumulative landscape and visual impact by causing (i) the coalescence of South Hatfield and Welham Green and (ii) significant harm to the fragile Local Gap between settlements, due to the reduction in physical and visual openness. There would also be significant cumulative impact in relation to the strategic 1st Tier gap between Hatfield and Potters Bar.
Welham Green – WeG1&2, WeG3, WeG10, WeG12, WeG15 and BrP4
5.17 With the exception of WeG15 and BrP4, all of these sites are adjacent to the urban area of Welham Green and would connect into the existing village as relatively small extensions. The individual or combined effects of development of these parcels to the south and southwest of Welham Green would not cause significant and irreversible cumulative landscape and visual effects although the cumulative harm to the strategic 1st Tier Gap between Hatfield and Potters Bar, to the west of the ECML, would be apparent.
5.18 The inclusion of WeG15 would trigger significant and irreversible cumulative landscape and visual effects by causing the excessive reduction of the strategic 1st Tier Gap between Hatfield and Potters Bar, cumulative harm to the Secondary Local Gap between Hatfield and Welham Green (due to excessive settlement expansion south and southwest), and the reduction in physical and visual openness to the south of Welham Green. This would be further exacerbated if one or more of the sites at South Hatfield (Hat11 and WeG8 - as assessed above) were developed in addition to WeG15.
1573 Brookmans Cumulative Impact Study Housing Distribution, Coalescence and Cumulative Impact Study – Brookmans Park 30
5.19 As such, landscape value, environmental impact and visual impact are relevant and significant considerations of the overall cumulative environmental effects, which also include the proximity of WeG15 to the Swallow Holes SSSI.
5.20 BrP4 has a Brookmans Park designation but it also impacts on Welham Green. BrP4 is to the west of the ECML and to the south of Welham Green within the strategic 1st Tier Gap between Hatfield and Potters Bar. It is also to the north of the Royal Veterinary College and to the west of the ECML at Brookmans Park, outside of the existing settlement. The environmental and visual impact of any development on BrP4 would be significant, regardless of other allocated sites in Welham Green or Brookmans Park. Taken cumulatively with WeG1, WeG2, WeG3 and WeG15 to the south and southwest of Welham Green, development of BrP4 would cause significant and irreversible cumulative landscape and visual impacts and cause coalescence between Hatfield, Welham Green, Brookmans Park, Potters Bar, the RVC and Water End.
Welham Green WeG4a
5.21 WeG4a is to the east of the ECML as described in paragraph 5.12C above. There are no significant local or long-range views to or from the site and it is largely contained by the ECML to the west and the A1000 to the east.
5.22 WeG4a is within walking distance of the local railway station but would have a degree or car dependency for other services and facilities within the locality.
5.23 WeG4a forms part of a larger site which is being advanced for employment uses. The proximity of the railway station and the likely inclusion of some local services within that larger development would be beneficial to the proposed housing development.
5.24 There are not considered to be any adverse cumulative environmental impacts resulting from the development of WeG4a.
1573 Brookmans Cumulative Impact Study Housing Distribution, Coalescence and Cumulative Impact Study – Brookmans Park 31
Brookmans Park – BrP4 and BrP6
5.25 In addition to the impact of BrP4 on Welham Green, it would also cause cumulative harm in Brookmans Park due to further adverse landscape and visual impacts resulting from inter-visibility with BrP6 (refer Figure 1 and Figure 2: Photo 6), which would be viewed from the site and given its visual setting with panoramic views, which include those extending up towards the RVC, Hawkshead Lane and BrP6.
5.26 Development of BrP4 would also cause cumulative green belt impact in relation to the strategic 1st Tier gap between Hatfield and Potters Bar, which would be further exacerbated if one or more of the sites at South Hatfield and Welham Green are also developed.
5.27 The Raybrook stream, Flood Zone 3, also passes along the southern boundary of BrP4 with potential harm to the SSSI at Water End. Significant road improvements to the site access from Brookmans Park (over the ECML), road widening to Bradmore Lane and Warrengate Road and bridge works across the Mimmshall Brook would all have a detrimental and cumulative environmental impact.
5.28 BrP6 is an exposed and elevated site which dominates Brookmans Park in visual and landscape terms. BrP6 is also exposed to the ECML railway along its western boundary and to the main highway through Brookmans Park (Bluebridge Road) along its eastern boundary, which are established transport corridors. The Raybrook stream, Flood Zone 3, also passes along the northern boundary of BrP6 where it adjoins the urban boundary of Brookmans Park.
5.29 BrP6 would result in cumulative harm due to further adverse landscape and visual impacts resulting from inter-visibility with BrP4 (refer Figure 1 and Figure 2: Photo 2), which would be viewed from the site given its visual setting with panoramic views, which include elevated views extending across the landscape towards Hatfield and include BrP4.
1573 Brookmans Cumulative Impact Study Housing Distribution, Coalescence and Cumulative Impact Study – Brookmans Park 32
5.30 There would also be cumulative green belt effects in relation to the strategic gap between Brookmans Park and Little Heath, which would reduce the gap more significantly due to the development of BrP6, and which would be further exacerbated if one or more of the sites at BrP9, BrP10 and/or BrP7 are developed in addition to BrP6.
Brookmans Park – BrP1 and BrP12
5.31 BrP12 is within walking distance of public transport and all services, amenities and facilities within Brookmans Park. The proposed footpath and cycleway between BrP12 and BrP1 will provide a new green link between Bell Bar and Brookmans Park, which is a significant environmental benefit. The management of the ancient woodlands (Peplins Wood and The Legg) and the creation of public open space and areas of ecological enhancement are all positive environmental improvements.
5.32 In respect of both BrP1 and BrP12, due to the absence of any inter-visibility between these and any other proposed sites, there is no cumulative landscape or visual impact.
5.33 There are minor views towards BrP12 from parts of Bradmore Way and Peplins Way but no significant views to or from BrP12 from public footpaths or transport corridors. There is no public access, at present, to BrP12 and therefore there are no publicly accessible views from the site that would form visual receptors.
5.34 BrP1 will benefit from the proposed new footpath and cycleway between Bell Bar and Brookmans Park. This will reduce car dependency and foster community cohesion. There are existing services in close proximity to BrP1 which provide for day to day needs.
5.35 BrP1 and BrP12 do not present any significant environmental impacts. There are likely to be positive environmental benefits from the development of new housing on these sites..
1573 Brookmans Cumulative Impact Study Housing Distribution, Coalescence and Cumulative Impact Study – Brookmans Park 33
Brookmans Park – BrP6, BrP9 and BrP10
5.36 BrP9 and BrP10 are not recommended for development in this report unless the need for new housing is considered to outweigh the adverse impacts. BrP10 lies adjacent to Gobions Historic Park and Gardens and development in its own right would have a landscape and visual effect on the area, in addition to affecting the setting of the Gobions parkland, and it also lies within the important settlement gap between Brookmans Park and Potters Bar. BrP9 is isolated from the existing village and in open countryside and would not be developed unless BrP10 is allocated. The additional cumulative harm resulting from the development of BrP6, BrP9 and BrP10 would be significant given the irreversible change to the character of the village approach from the south (from Hawkshead Road). The extensive accumulation of environmental impacts would seriously and irreversibly cause harm to the setting of the historic parkland at Gobions due to the development of multiple sites to the south of Brookmans Park.
5.37 BrP9 and BrP10 are both within walking distance of public transport and the wide range of services, amenities and facilities in Brookmans Park. The development of BrP10 would cause less cumulative impact and be less harmful to the environment than the development of BrP7, in Little Heath.
Little Heath – BrP7 and LHe1
5.38 In Little Heath, significant environmental and landscape considerations would weigh heavily against BrP7. This site is in an open and exposed location at a high point in the borough. It also lies in the sightline of an important vista to and from the Gobions Historic Park and Gardens, which is focused on the Grade II Listed Folly Arch in Little Heath.
5.39 Impacts from the development of BrP7 would be further increased by the inter- visibility with the upper parts of BrP6, which are visible from this elevated site (refer Figure 1 and Figure 2: photo 1). The cumulative harm caused by development of both BrP6 and BrP7 (particularly when combined together with BrP9 and/or BrP10)
1573 Brookmans Cumulative Impact Study Housing Distribution, Coalescence and Cumulative Impact Study – Brookmans Park 34
would significantly reduce the important green belt gap (both physically and perceptively) between Brookmans Park and Little Heath, causing an irreversible loss of high physical and visual openness in the landscape, with substantial harm to the setting and character of Swanley Bar. The consequence of development on BrP7 would not safeguard the countryside, would not preserve the setting or maintain the existing settlement pattern and would contribute significantly to coalescence and merging.
5.40 BrP7 would be largely car dependent and would rely on Potters Bar for most of its services, facilities and amenities.
5.41 For a combination of planning, landscape and environmental reasons, BrP7 is not recommended for allocation in this report.
5.42 The small site of LHe1 is not in a sustainable location and would be largely car dependent. Nevertheless, due to the small scale of development on that site, the environmental impacts would not significantly or demonstrably outweigh the benefits of some housing development. There is no inter-visibility between LHe1 and BrP7.
Environmental Conclusion
5.43 The sites found suitable and sustainable for development and listed in Table 3 and shown on Map 4 (Section 6 of this report) are, with the exception of LHe1, all within walking distance of public transport and a wide range of local services, amenities and facilities, including schools. LHe1 is considered too small to have a significant harmful environmental impact.
5.44 All of the sites in Table 3 and on Map 4, with the exception of BrP6, would have limited landscape and visual impact. BrP6 would have significant visual and landscape impact due to the topography of the land and its exposure to transport corridors. However, this should be balanced against the sustainable location of
1573 Brookmans Cumulative Impact Study Housing Distribution, Coalescence and Cumulative Impact Study – Brookmans Park 35
Brookmans Park and the close proximity of BrP6 to public transport and to local services, facilities and amenities.
5.45 BrP1 and BrP12 both provide potential environmental benefits with limited visual landscape impact.
1573 Brookmans Cumulative Impact Study Housing Distribution, Coalescence and Cumulative Impact Study – Brookmans Park 36
6 SITE SELECTION
6.1 This report has identified the most suitable and sustainable sites in Brookmans Park, Welham Green and Little Heath. These sites do not display adverse impacts that would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits of housing provision. These sites are listed below in Table 3 and shown on Map 4:
Table 3 – Sites Suitable for Allocation Site Brookmans Welham Little Heath Designation Park Green BrP1 100 BrP6 170 BrP12 100 BrP13 5 BrP14 5 WeG1 and 2 25 WeG3 45 WeG4a 120 Weg10 120 WeG12 65 LHe1 35 Total 380 375 35 (Overall Total = 790 new homes)
Table 4 – Sites Not Suitable For Allocation
Site Hatfield Welham Brookmans Little Designation Green Park Heath Hat11 150 WeG6 70 WeG8 325 WeG15 175 BrP4 300 BrP9 190 BrP10 120 BrP7 (Little 195 Heath) Total 150 570 610 195
(Total 1,525)
1573 Brookmans Cumulative Impact Study Housing Distribution, Coalescence and Cumulative Impact Study – Brookmans Park 37
MAP 4 – Sites Suitable For Allocation
1573 Brookmans Cumulative Impact Study Housing Distribution, Coalescence and Cumulative Impact Study – Brookmans Park 38
6.2 Based on proportional distribution of new housing within the borough, Brookmans Park would be required to accommodate 467 new homes, Welham Green 410 new homes and Little Heath 141 new homes (see Table 1), being a total of 1018 new homes across the three settlements. Therefore, Table 3, which identifies the most suitable sites in the most sustainable locations, has a combined shortfall of 228 new homes across the three villages.
1573 Brookmans Cumulative Impact Study Housing Distribution, Coalescence and Cumulative Impact Study – Brookmans Park 39
7 CUMULATIVE IMPACT
7.1 Coalescence is a direct and particular impact whereas cumulative impact is a combination of impacts. Where coalescence and cumulative impact are both present, cumulative impact might be reduced or resolved by not allocating those sites which cause coalescence.
7.2 This report does not seek to examine the cumulative impact of new housing development on the capacity of the local or strategic highway network.
7.3 As stated previously in this report, if all of the potential sites (both to the east and west of the ECML) were allocated, this would provide 2,250 new homes in the plan period, which represents approximately 16% of the borough’s OAN (Map 3 – Table 2). However, having regard to adverse planning, landscape, highway and environmental impacts, together with coalescence, particularly in the fragile gap between Hatfield and Welham Green to the north of the subject area and in Little Heath to the south of the subject area, HAT11, WeG8, BrP4, BrP7 and have all been found to be unsuitable for site allocation. WeG6, WeG15, BrP9 and BrP10 have also been found unsuitable for the reasons stated in paragraphs 5.12D, 5.12G and 5.13D. Map 4 shows the suitable sites that would remain, which would provide a total of 790 new homes (Table 3).
7.4 Based on proportional distribution of housing throughout the borough, Brookmans Park should have 467 new homes (3.3% of new dwellings in the borough), Welham Green should have 410 new homes (2.9% of new dwellings in the borough) and Little Heath should have 141 new homes (1% of new dwellings in the borough). However, Table 3 demonstrates that only 380 new homes can be provided on suitable and sustainable sites in Brookmans Park (2.7% of OAN), Welham Green would provide 375 new homes (2.6% of OAN) and Little Heath would provide 35 new homes (0.25% of OAN). Overall, this would be a shortfall of 228 homes across the three villages.
7.5 The next step is to consider the cumulative impact of 770 new homes (Map 4) in the villages of Welham Green, Brookmans Park and Little Heath.
1573 Brookmans Cumulative Impact Study Housing Distribution, Coalescence and Cumulative Impact Study – Brookmans Park 40
Welham Green
7.6 As can be seen from the site locations on Map 4, Welham Green would have six potential sites, of which three (WeG1, WeG2 and WeG3) are effectively one site, to the south west of Welham Green. WeG10 is to the west of Welham Green, to the north of Dixons Hill Road. WeG4a is to the east of the ECML. WeG12 is to the north of Welham Green and is within the most fragile gap between Hatfield and Welham Green but is considered, by itself, to be too small to cause significant coalescence between south Hatfield and Welham Green.
7.7 The physical distribution of development around the village of Welham Green (Map 4) appears to be reasonable and proportionate and would not cause significant cumulative impact.
Brookmans Park
7.8 In Brookmans Park, there are five sites, two of which are small self-contained sites (BrP13 and BrP14) that are too small to give rise to any material cumulative impact.
7.9 BrP1 and BrP12 are located to the north of Brookmans Park, with no issues of coalescence or cumulative impact.
7.10 BrP6 is located to the south of Brookmans Park, in the small gap between Brookmans Park and Potters Bar. There are some important planning and landscape issues (as stated in paragraph 5.13C) but these are not considered to significantly and demonstrably outweigh the need for new homes, provided BrP7 in Little Heath is not allocated.
7.11 Overall, looking at the physical cumulative impact, the allocation of BrP1, BrP6 and BrP12 would (together with BrP13 and BrP14) provide 380 new dwellings in the highly sustainable location of Brookmans Park, on sites which are evenly distributed around the existing village (Map 4).
7.12 Having regard to the suitability and sustainability of Brookmans Park and the balanced distribution of proposed sites around that settlement, the allocation of BrP1, BrP6 and BrP12 would not amount to any significant or demonstrable cumulative impact in Brookmans Park. The allocation of BrP7 in Little Heath would
1573 Brookmans Cumulative Impact Study Housing Distribution, Coalescence and Cumulative Impact Study – Brookmans Park 41
cause further harmful cumulative impact between Little Heath, Swanley Bar and Brookmans Park, in particular with BrP6.
Little Heath
7.13 Little Heath is not a sustainable location for major development of new dwellings and, for the reasons stated in paragraph 5.14A and 5.14B above, only LHe1 should be allocated for development. This site is too small to have any major physical cumulative impact.
South Hatfield
7.14 Land to the south of the A1001 (HAT11 and WeG8) is not a suitable or sustainable location for new housing and would cause severe coalescence within the fragile Green Belt gap between Hatfield and Welham Green. The exclusion of these sites from allocation would also remove any potential for cumulative impact with the more suitable and sustainable sites in Welham Green.
Borough Distribution
7.15 The borough has an objectively assessed housing need in the upper range of 664 to 707 new homes per annum. Over a 20 year plan period, this would be 13,280 to 14,140.
7.16 The Map of the borough below shows the potential new housing distribution to the north and south of the borough.
7.17 Should the Council allocate sites in the three large villages of Brookmans Park, Welham Green and Cuffley for 400 new homes per village (1,200 in total), this would only be equivalent to 8.5% of the borough’s objectively assessed need. As a consequence, the other 91.5% would need to be located to the north of Hatfield. This will give a “top heavy” distribution of housing in the northern areas of the borough, as shown on the borough map below, which is likely to lead to significant cumulative impact around Welwyn Garden City and Hatfield and a heavy burden on infrastructure, particularly roads and schools.
1573 Brookmans Cumulative Impact Study Housing Distribution, Coalescence and Cumulative Impact Study – Brookmans Park 42
Borough Map (Assumes 400 new homes in each of the large villages of Brookmans Park, Welham Green and Cuffley)
1573 Brookmans Cumulative Impact Study Housing Distribution, Coalescence and Cumulative Impact Study – Brookmans Park 43
8 CONCLUSION
8.1 This report demonstrates that developing all of the sites on Map 3 (table 2) would result in harmful cumulative impacts to the south of Hatfield and, in particular, to the west of the ECML in the fragile gap between Hatfield and Potters Bar (Map 1). However this can be avoided by focusing development in the most suitable and sustainable locations where harm is limited and the collective sites do not cause cumulative impact. The most appropriate sites, which would not result in an unsustainable or unsuitable pattern of development or result in material cumulative effects, are shown on Map 4 and listed in Table 3 - being:
Brookmans Park
BrP1
BrP6
BrP12
BrP13
BrP14
Welham Green
WeG1 and WeG2
WeG3 (subject to the allocation of WeG1 and WeG2)
WeG4a (subject to the allocation of WeG4)
WeG10
WeG12 (marginal)
8.2 This would provide 380 new homes in Brookmans Park and 375 new homes in Welham Green. LHe1 in Little Heath would also contribute 35 new homes, being a total of 790 in these three villages.
1573 Brookmans Cumulative Impact Study Housing Distribution, Coalescence and Cumulative Impact Study – Brookmans Park 44
8.3 The above site allocation and distribution of new housing in Brookmans Park, Welham Green and Little Heath would be a fair distribution based on sustainability and site suitability and would not cause significant or demonstrable adverse impacts or cumulative impact. This balanced approach would meet a significant proportion of the OAN but would fall short of proportional distribution.
1573 Brookmans Cumulative Impact Study
Housing Distribution, Coalescence and Cumulative Impact Study
SOUTH HATFIELD, WELHAM GREEN, BROOKMANS PARK AND LITTLE HEATH, HERTFORDSHIRE
APPENDICES
May 2016 Appendix A SOUTH HATFIELD, WELHAM GREEN, BROOKMANS PARK AND LITTLE HEATH, HERTFORDSHIRE
HOUSING DISTRIBUTION, COALESCENCE AND CUMULATIVE IMPACT STUDY
Figures
May 2016
FIGURE 1: SITE ALLOCATIONS FIGURE 2: LANDSCAPE AND VISUAL CUMULATIVE EFFECTS PHOTOGRAPHIC SHEETS (4 SHEETS)
1573 Figure 1
Site Allocations [email protected] www.lizlake.com
Hat11 WeG8 WeG4a 11 WeG12 10
WeG10
9 WeG3 8 WeG6 BrP1 12 WeG15 7
BrP12
6
BrP4
3 4 5
BrP6 2
BrP7 BrP7 Extension 1
Key Project: Brookmans Estate Long / panoramic views Photo Locations 1 from public locations Client: Aurora Properties Limited
Date: March 2016 Views with cumulative impacts Scale: 1:25,000 @A3
Status: FINAL
© COPYRIGHT LIZ LAKE ASSOCIATES Reproduced from Ordnance Survey map data by permission of Ordnance Survey © Crown copyright 2015 Licence No.100007196 © Crown copyright and database rights 2015 Ordnance Survey Licence No.0100031673 1573 Figure 2 Sheet 1 of 4
offi [email protected] www.lizlake.com Landscape and Visual Cumulative Eff ects Photographic Sheets
Properties along Kerdistone Close
BrP6
Boltons Park (College) Folly Arch Properties along Hawkshead Road
BrP7
Photo Location 1: View north west from BrP7.
Brookmans Park United Reformed Church Transmitting and Satellite Station
BrP4 Peplins Wood Rail Line Bluebridge Road
BrP6
Photo Location 2: View north / north west from BrP6, adjacent to Hawkshead Road.
BrP6
Westland Drive
Photo Location 3: View south towards BrP6, taken from The Gardens.
© COPYRIGHT LIZ LAKE ASSOCIATES Reproduced from Ordnance Survey map data by permission of Ordnance Survey © Crown copyright 2015 Licence No.100007196 © Crown copyright and database rights 2015 Ordnance Survey Licence No.0100031673 Project: Brookmans Estate | Client: Aurora Properties Limited | Date: May 2016 | Status: FINAL 1573 Figure 2 Sheet 2 of 4
offi [email protected] www.lizlake.com Landscape and Visual Cumulative Eff ects Photographic Sheets
BrP6
Oaklands Avenue
Photo Location 4: View south towards BrP6, taken from Oaklands Avenue.
BrP6
Bluebridge Road
Photo Location 5: View south towards BrP6, taken from Bluebridge Road.
BrP6 Royal Veterinary College
Rail Line
BrP4
Photo Location 6: View south east towards BrP6, taken from BrP4 adjacent to Bradmore Lane.
© COPYRIGHT LIZ LAKE ASSOCIATES Reproduced from Ordnance Survey map data by permission of Ordnance Survey © Crown copyright 2015 Licence No.100007196 © Crown copyright and database rights 2015 Ordnance Survey Licence No.0100031673 Project: Brookmans Estate | Client: Aurora Properties Limited | Date: May 2016 | Status: FINAL 1573 Figure 2 Sheet 3 of 4
offi [email protected] www.lizlake.com Landscape and Visual Cumulative Eff ects Photographic Sheets
Properties along Station WeG3 Road
WeG15
Photo Location 7: View west / north west taken from WeG15.
WeG15
Station Road
Photo Location 8: View south east across WeG15, taken from Station Road.
Peplins Wood
WeG6
Bulls Lane
Photo Location 9: View east across WeG6, taken from Bulls Lane.
© COPYRIGHT LIZ LAKE ASSOCIATES Reproduced from Ordnance Survey map data by permission of Ordnance Survey © Crown copyright 2015 Licence No.100007196 © Crown copyright and database rights 2015 Ordnance Survey Licence No.0100031673 Project: Brookmans Estate | Client: Aurora Properties Limited | Date: May 2016 | Status: FINAL 1573 Figure 2 Sheet 4 of 4
offi [email protected] www.lizlake.com Landscape and Visual Cumulative Eff ects Photographic Sheets
Travellers Lane Industrial Area
WeG12
Photo Location 10: View north east across WeG12.
WeG8
Photo Location 11: View north towards South Hatfi eld, across WeG8.
Signifi cant hedgerow boundaries
BrP1
Photo Location 12: View north across BrP1 from within Site (photo taken from within Site due to extensive mature hedgerow boundaries).
© COPYRIGHT LIZ LAKE ASSOCIATES Reproduced from Ordnance Survey map data by permission of Ordnance Survey © Crown copyright 2015 Licence No.100007196 © Crown copyright and database rights 2015 Ordnance Survey Licence No.0100031673 Project: Brookmans Estate | Client: Aurora Properties Limited | Date: May 2016 | Status: FINAL Appendix B SOUTH HATFIELD, WELHAM GREEN, BROOKMANS PARK AND LITTLE HEATH, HERTFORDSHIRE
HOUSING DISTRIBUTION, COALESCENCE AND CUMULATIVE IMPACT STUDY
May 2016
GOBIONS (GUBBINS) PARK - List Entry No. 1000495 Historic England (2013)
GOBIONS WOOD LEAFLET (EXTRACT) - Herts and Middlesex Wildlife Trust
10/16/13 List Entry
List Entry Summary
This garden or other land is registered under the Historic Buildings and Ancient Monuments Act 1953 within the Register of Historic Parks and Gardens by English Heritage for its special historic interest.
Name: GOBIONS (GUBBINS)
List Entry Number: 1000495
Location
The garden or other land may lie within the boundary of more than one authority.
County: Hertfordshire District: Welwyn Hatfield District Type: District Authority Parish: North Mymms
National Park: Not applicable to this List entry.
Grade: II
Date first registered: 11-Jun-1987
Date of most recent amendment: Not applicable to this List entry.
Legacy System Information
The contents of this record have been generated from a legacy data system.
Legacy System: Parks and Gardens
UID: 1471
Asset Groupings
This List entry does not comprise part of an Asset Grouping. Asset Groupings are not part of the official record but are added later for information.
List Entry Description
Summary of Garden
Legacy Record - This information may be included in the List Entry Details. list.english-heritage.org.uk/resultsingle_print.aspx?uid=1000495&showMap=1&showText=1 1/6 10/16/13 List Entry Reasons for Designation
Legacy Record - This information may be included in the List Entry Details.
History
Legacy Record - This information may be included in the List Entry Details.
Details
The remains of an C18 pleasure ground laid out by Charles Bridgeman in the 1730s, surrounded by a landscape park developed during the later C18 and early C19. The house was demolished c 1838.
HISTORIC DEVELOPMENT
From at least the 1390s (VCH) the manor of More Hall was owned by the More family, who built Gobions House within the estate during the C16. Sir Thomas More, Henry VIII's Lord Chancellor, was executed in 1535, probably having written Utopia at More Hall. At this time the estate reverted to the Crown, being restored to the family in 1607. Basil More sold the estate in 1693, it being purchased in 1708 by Sir Jeremy Sambrooke (d 1754), who made major improvements to the property. In 1730 (Cobham 1990) Charles Bridgeman, the Royal Gardener (d 1738), was employed to make a 'Pleasure Garden' in Great or Gobions Wood, detached from the house, this being shown on an estate map of c 1735 (GRO). The map shows the woodland containing various formal features, including a bowling green and canals linked by straight walks, enclosed by avenues crossing the adjacent fields and parkland. James Gibbs designed, c 1740, a temple facade to terminate the largest canal, together with the large Folly Arch, a three-storey gothick gateway, to terminate one of the main avenues at the southern boundary of the estate.
Gubbins House, as it was by that time known, was visited by Queen Caroline and her three daughters in 1732, when the gardens were described as second only to Stowe in their beauty. They were depicted in 1748 by Chatelaine in his views of the canal and bowling green. The estate was much admired during the C18.
In 1777 the estate was sold by the Freemans to John Hunter, it in turn passing in 1802 to his great-nephew Thomas Holmes, who changed his name to Hunter. Little is known of the development of the landscape at this time. By 1815 (sale plan, HRO) the parkland north and east of Gobions Wood had been landscaped, and the serpentine Gubbins Pond had been laid out close to the house and garden.
In 1836 Robert William Gaussen (d 1880) of Brookmans Park, a director and Governor of the Bank of England, bought Gobions (to which the name had reverted in the late C18/early C19), combining the two estates and pulling down Gobions House c 1838. Gaussen carried out planting in the area of woodland west of Bridgeman's work, which became increasingly neglected. In 1923 the Gaussen family sold the Brookmans and Gobions estates to developers, and houses were built along the north and east boundaries of the Gobions parkland. The remaining Gobions land, approximately one third of which is in public ownership and open to the public, is now (1999) in divided ownership.
DESCRIPTION
LOCATION, AREA, BOUNDARIES, LANDFORM, SETTING Gobions lies 2km north of the centre of Potters Bar and 4km south-east of Hatfield. The c 90ha park is bounded to the north and east by mid to late C20 housing, separating the park from its former eastern boundary, the Great North Road, and former northern boundary, the remains of the parkland of the former Brookmans Park. To the north of the C20 Brookmans Park development lies the former parkland of the Brookmans Park estate, now (1999) a golf course, with which the Gobions parkland was joined in the mid C19 by Robert William Gaussen. The southern boundary is marked at the east end partly by Swanley Bar Lane, from which the park is separated in places by further C20 development. The west end of the southern boundary is marked by Hawkshead Lane. To the west the park is partly bounded by a track south from Moffats farm, beyond which lies other open amenity land. The immediate setting to the south, west and east list.english-heritage.org.uk/resultsingle_print.aspx?uid=1000495&showMap=1&showText=1 2/6 10/16/13 List Entry is rural, with, to the north, the C20 Brookmans Park housing development, and to the south buildings at Bolton's Park Farm and the taller buildings of Potters Bar, visible from high ground in the park. To the east lies Leggatts Park, also part of the Brookmans Park estate in the C19.
ENTRANCES AND APPROACHES The present approach (1999) enters at the north-west corner of the park, near Moffats, off Moffats Lane. A much-extended, single-storey brick lodge stands 300m north of Gobions Pond, adjacent to the Lane. From here a track runs south into the north-west corner of the parkland, now Gobions Open Space, to a car park.
In the 1730s (estate map, c 1735) the house, which stood where the woodland known as Gobions Garden now lies, was approached directly off a lane which ran approximately west to east, to the north of the house. The house was set back behind a walled forecourt with a central gateway giving access from the road. The lane was closed later in the C18 and incorporated within the park, becoming a private drive giving access from the Great North Road to the east.
By 1815 (sale map) Moffats Lane had been constructed to the north of the house. A serpentine drive led south-east from the site of Moffats Lodge across the park to the house, meeting a second drive, from the east, following the course of the former road which linked Moffats with the old Great North Road turnpike.
In the mid C19 Gaussen joined the Brookmans and Gobions estates, linking the two via a new south to north drive, which gave access from Hawkshead Lane on the south boundary. The drive, now (1999) largely lost, entered at Folly Arch (James Gibbs c 1740, listed grade II*), which had not been part of an entrance to the estate until then. The large, brick-built archway of Folly Arch is flanked by two slender, three-storey crenellated towers, and is a very early example of the Gothick style. To the east of the Arch stood the mid C19 lodge, replaced in the late C20. From here the mid C19 drive formerly extended north, flanked by an avenue of trees, to enter the south side of Gobions Wood, through which it continued, emerging on the north side to continue north through the Gobions and Brookmans parkland to Brookmans house to the north. North-east of Gobions Garden the drive was flanked by two widely spaced parallel avenues of trees, in place since at least 1815 (sale map).
PRINCIPAL BUILDING Gobions house lay within what is now (1999) an area of woodland called Gobions Garden, formerly the site of the garden surrounding the house. James Gibbs (1682-1754) extended the house in the 1740s, and it was pulled down c 1838 by Gaussen. A view of Gobions published in 1840 by J C Buckler (HRO) shows it to have been in Classical style.
GARDENS AND PLEASURE GROUNDS The site of the former gardens around the house is now marked by Gobions Garden woodland, which contains several mature ornamental trees including cedars. In the 1730s (estate map, c 1735) a small, enclosed formal garden court lay to the south-west of the house, crossed centrally by a path leading from the south-west, garden front to a gateway. From here an avenue extended across fields past a small pond towards what is now known as Deep Bottom woodland. One hundred years later (sale map, 1833) the park swept up to the house, except to the north-west where, beyond the stables and service courts, a substantial kitchen garden lay surrounded by a narrow band of woodland.
The south-west boundary of Gobions Garden wood is marked by the early C19 Gobions Pond (sale map, 1815). This serpentine lake, formerly overlooked by the house to the north-east, is dammed on the south and west sides and encircled by a path, with views south and west across the park to distant countryside. From the south side of the Pond a path leads south to Gobions Wood, past the small pond lying on the north side of the Wood. A further path leads south from the east end of Gobions Pond, on the course of a C19 or earlier path, to the west end of the early C18 pleasure grounds.
A network of watercourses runs from east to west through a valley at the centre of Gobions Wood. The west end of the Wood is occupied by Deep Bottom, near the east end of which are the probable remains of an icehouse.
The east end of Gobions Wood is the site of the 1730 Bridgeman pleasure ground. A small mound, on which stood a statue of Hercules, lies towards the centre of the Wood, marking a rond point adjacent to the east list.english-heritage.org.uk/resultsingle_print.aspx?uid=1000495&showMap=1&showText=1 3/6 10/16/13 List Entry side of Gaussen's drive through the Wood. Formerly several straight walks, part of the Bridgeman scheme, extended from this mound through the woodland, each aligned on an ornamental feature.
One walk leading to the south edge of the woodland (now marked by the course of the mid C19 Gaussen drive), gave a view of the site of the later (c 1740) Folly Arch across the parkland, on the horizon. A second walk to the south-east led to the large bowling green, still discernible as a level area set into surrounding earth banks, within the woodland. This, as illustrated by Chatelaine in 1748, was surrounded by clipped yew hedges, with a small, square, domed summerhouse on a bank at one end (now gone, although foundations may remain). The third walk led north-east to the long, narrow, rectangular canal, set within the woodland and edged with a strip of lawn, embellished from the 1740s by Gibbs' temple facade at the north-east end. The canal remains, enclosed by woodland, but the temple facade has gone. The fourth walk from the rond point led north-west to an informal pond made by widening the main stream which ran through the woodland. A similar pond was restored c 1990.
From the north-east end of the bowling green stepped banks formerly led down to a further open space, from which a straight walk led through the Wood to a further canal to the north-east of the main canal (estate map, c 1735). This second canal, still extant, lies, as in the C18, within the open park, extending north from the woodland boundary. In the 1730s it led north to a fan-shaped wood containing serpentine paths surrounding a large open area of grass and scattered trees (ibid). This outer wood had gone by the late C19 (OS).
In the 1730s the house was linked to Gobions Wood and the fan-shaped wood by three avenues arranged in patte d'oie form (ibid). These extended across the park between the house and the woods, east to the fan- shaped wood, south-east to the south end of the canal linking the two woods, and the north-west side of the main canal. These avenues had gone by the early C19 (sale map, 1815).
Further features, now lost, which once stood in Gobions Wood include a grotto, a figure of Time holding a sundial, a wooden summerhouse in lattice pattern, a cascade, a figure of Cleopatra, a large pigeon house and various other statues and urns (The Ambulator; or, The Stranger's Companion 1774). The pigeon house was dismantled by Gaussen in the mid C19. Further walks linked the formal features in Gobions Wood in the 1730s, these being lost to later woodland growth. Drawings by Gibbs 'for Mr Sambrooke at Gubbins' exist (Ashmolean Museum, Oxford, reproduced in Willis 1977) showing a temple and dovecote, both octagonal, in elevation and plan form.
The pleasure ground at Gobions was greatly admired during the C18. George Bickham the Younger, writing in his Beauties of Stowe (1750), proclaimed that 'the famous Garden of Sir Jeremy Sambrooke, at Gubbins ... deserves a Traveller's Admiration' for there he would see 'a sensible Resemblance in Miniature of Stowe'. Bickham continued, waxing lyrical with a description of the beauties of the features to be encountered at Gubbins, which 'form all together almost the only Garden in its Kind'. Horace Walpole (1785, reprinted 1995), in reference to Bridgeman and his style, stated 'I have observed in the garden at Gubbins ... many detached thoughts, that strongly indicate the dawn of modern taste'.
PARK Gobions park occupies the valley sides flanking Gobions Wood and Deep Bottom to the north and south. It is largely pasture with some arable land, but occasional park trees remain.
In the 1730s only the area between the house and Gobions Wood was parkland, the rest of the later park being divided into fields. Avenues then extended through these fields, enclosing Gobions Wood (estate map, c 1735). By the early C19 the avenues had gone, except for that linking Folly Arch with the pleasure grounds, and most of the park had been landscaped (sale maps 1815; 1833). The park north and east of Gobions Wood was landscaped and planted with park trees in clumps and singles, although the area between Gobions Wood and Hawkshead Lane still retained field boundaries and was planted with clumps of trees.
REFERENCES
Victoria History of the County of Hertfordshire 2, (1908), pp 256-7 B Cherry and N Pevsner, The Buildings of England: Hertfordshire (1977), pp 112-13 P Willis, Charles Bridgeman and the English Landscape Garden (1977), pp 86-7, pls 83, 84 list.english-heritage.org.uk/resultsingle_print.aspx?uid=1000495&showMap=1&showText=1 4/6 10/16/13 List Entry Gobions Estate North Mymms, Hertfordshire, guidebook, (P Kingsford et al 1993) Brookmans Park Newsletter (1993), at www.brookmans.com A Management Plan for Gobions Wood, (Cobham Resource Consultants 1990) H Walpole, The History of the Modern Taste in Gardening (1785, 1995 edn), p 42
Maps Gubbins estate map, c 1735 (D1245/FF.75), (Gloucestershire Record Office) Dury and Andrews, A topographical Map of Hartford-shire, 1766 Sale map, Gobions estate, 1815 (31437), (Hertfordshire Record Office) A Bryant, The County of Hertford, 1822 Sale map, Gobions estate, 1833 (66057), (Hertfordshire Record Office)
OS 6" to 1 mile: 1st edition published 1879 2nd edition published 1898 OS 25" to 1 mile: 2nd edition published 1898 1914 revised edition 3rd edition published 1935
Description written: June 1999 Amended: October 2000 Register Inspector: SR Edited: November 2000
Selected Sources
Legacy Record - This information may be included in the List Entry Details.
Map
National Grid Reference: TL 25403 03469
The below map is for quick reference purposes only and may not be to scale. For a copy of the full scale map, please see the attached PDF - 1000495.pdf
list.english-heritage.org.uk/resultsingle_print.aspx?uid=1000495&showMap=1&showText=1 5/6 10/16/13 List Entry
Gobions Wood Historic Park and Gardens
Folly Arch
© Crown Copyright and database right 2012. All rights reserved. Ordnance Survey Licence number 100019088. © British Crown and SeaZone Solutions Limited 2011. All rights reserved. Licence number 102006.006.
This copy shows the entry on 16-Oct-2013 at 04:24:15.
list.english-heritage.org.uk/resultsingle_print.aspx?uid=1000495&showMap=1&showText=1 6/6
HERTFORDSHIRE GARDENS TRUST
SPRING NEWSLETTER 2015 AND ANNUAL REPORT
My Work with the HGT—Tom Williamson
My ‘day job’, so to speak, is teaching landscape history at the University of East Anglia in Norwich, but I have worked with the research group of the Hertfordshire Gardens Trust since the late 1990s, and hope to do so for many years to come. An exile from the county, I still wonder at the strange and striking contrasts it presents, between the busy south and west - with London close at hand – and the north and east, which has a landscape more rural in character. Even here, however, pressure on the historic landscape generally, and on ‘designed’ land- scapes - on parks and gardens – more particularly, is intense. The most important role of the Trust, directed with such skill and determination by Kate Harwood, is that of monitoring developments and lobbying the planning authorities to protect our heritage of gardens and parks. But to do this effectively we need to know more about our gardens, so that we can identify the places which are particularly worthy of conservation, and justify our arguments for conserving them. Conservation and research have thus, for a long time, gone hand in hand in the work of the HGT.
My work with the Trust has, over the years, been very varied. I helped, back in the late 1990s, to write up the survey of gardens and parks in west Hertfordshire which was published – thanks especially to the work of Anne Rowe and Ann Mallinson – in 2000 as The Parks and Gardens of West Hertfordshire. Since then I have attended meetings and offered advice on subsequent phases of the Trust’s survey work. I have also had the pleasure of contributing to the Trust’s second book – Hertfordshire Garden History: A Miscellany, edited by Anne Rowe - and to some of the remarkable conferences and symposia organised by the Trust. One of these resulted in another book - Hertfordshire Garden History vol. II: Gardens pleasant, Groves delicious, edited by Deborah Spring – and both volumes have a proud place on the bookshelves in my study, and constitute major contributions to the study of
Tom Williamson (on the left), supervising members of the Research Group on the site of the Bowling Green at Gobions Wood.
20 garden history. Over the last few years, however, I have been mainly involved in studying the county’s rich legacy of ‘archaeological’ gardens. In part because of its proximity to London and the rapid turn-over of properties, Hertfordshire has more than its fair share of ‘lost’ gardens, largely preserved in the form of earthworks. Working with Anne Rowe and a well-honed group of HGT surveyors I have been involved in researching and planning a range of sites in the county including Offley Holes (an early twentieth-century ‘arts and crafts’ garden associated with a now demolished house); Popes near Hatfield (an astonishing mid-eighteenth cen- tury water garden, now dry, buried in dense woodland); Tring Park (the Trust’s most recent restoration triumph); and, above all, Gobions near Brookmans park.
Gobions was designed by the great Charles Bridgeman for Jeremy Sambrooke in the late 1720s and early 1730s and was the most celebrated garden in eighteenth- century Hertfordshire. George Bickham in his famous Beauties of Stowe of 1750 praised it as a place of ‘surprising Greatness’ and ‘a sensible Resemblance in Miniature of Stow’, while Horace Walpole in 1780 lauded it as a seminal landscape in which ‘many detached thoughts, that strongly indicate the dawn of modern taste’ could be observed, in part because of its ‘pleasing Variety of Prospects’. The gardens survive only in vestigial form, as earthworks, and - covering a vast and well -wooded area - have not been easy to survey, or to understand. But the hard work of the surveying team (experts all in the operation of a Total Station Theodolite!), coupled with Anne Rowe’s discovery of Bridgeman’s original plan for the site in the Bodleian Library in Oxford, hitherto quite unknown, have ensured that their layout and meaning are now much clearer.
The gardens, associated with a house demolished in the 1840s, were laid out within an area of ancient woodland on either side of a deeply incised stream and comprised a network of paths – some straight, some serpentine – connecting a number of clearings. These contained a bowling green, ornamental canal, grotto, lake with cascade and a number of
Detail from Charles Bridgeman's plan of the gardens at Gobions, showing the Bowling Green House.
21 statues and buildings. Bridgeman exploited the undulating topography with considerable skill, ensuring that the garden’s various elements were visually linked in a tantalising fashion, inviting exploration. Much of the surrounding estate was, moreover, crossed by walks which extended the line of the allées within the wood- land, or was otherwise incorporated into carefully composed views. On the low hill to the south a prominent eye-catcher terminated one of the main vistas within the gardens, a gothic gate tower designed by James Gibbs, which still survives (it may predate Gibb’s Gothic Temple at Stowe, often posited as the earliest eighteenth- century garden building in this style). The original design also included, again on the low hill just outside the gardens, a romantic ruin, but this was never built. The most striking feature of the gardens – and perhaps that which made them so appealing to Walpole and Bickham – was the way in which they were so poorly related to Gobions House itself. The two lay more than two hundred metres apart were connected by only a single avenue: this pre-dates Bridgeman’s involvement here and was not employed as a major articulating axis within the new design. The gardens were, in consequence, something to be experienced in their own right, rather than functioning primarily as a setting for, or view from, the house. This may have been the main reason why Walpole and others considered that Gobions marked a major stage in the development of the English landscape garden.
The work of the Trust’s research group is at the cutting edge of landscape research. It involves the systematic combination of documentary, cartographic, botanical and documentary evidence. Over the past few months commitments in East Anglia, Warwickshire and elsewhere have conspired to keep me away from the county and from the work of the group. But later this year I look forward to working once again with a most inspiring group of people, both at Gobions and elsewhere.
The remains of one of the allees in the gardens at Gobions, focussed on James Gibbs' 'Folly Arch' on the skyline.
22 Stansted: Bristol: Nottingham: Unit 1, The Exchange, 1 Host Street, Sutton Place, 49 Stoney St, 9 Station Road, Stansted, CM24 8BE Bristol, BS1 5BU Nottingham NG1 1LX
t +44 (0)1279 647044 t +44 (0)117 927 1786 t +44 (0)115 784 3566 e [email protected] www.lizlake.com
∎ Landscape Design
∎ Urban Design
∎ Residential
∎ Public Realm
∎ Masterplanning
∎ Landscape Planning
∎ Heritage Landscapes
∎ Gardens and Estates
∎ Restoration and Conversion
∎ Places of Worship
∎ Expert Witness
∎ Hospitality
∎ Education
∎ Retail / Office
∎ Community
∎ Ecology
∎ Arboriculture
∎ 3D / Graphic Design Welwyn Hatfield Local Plan Stage 2 Hearing Statement – Aurora Properties (UK) Ltd
Appendix 4: Site Selection Analysis
14 Suitable, Available and Achievable Sites in HELAA and found to be Reasonable Alternatives in SA
Suitable, Available and Reasonable Achievable Alternative in Reasonable and a Suitable, Available Housing Housing WHBC Alternative Reasonable Settlement and Achievable Housing Number Number Not Sustainability Housing Alternaive Site Identification Hierachy (HELLA) Number Allocated Allocated Allocated Appraisal Number in SA 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No Welwyn Garden City Main Town SDS1/WGC4 and WGC7 (GB) Yes 75 Yes 75 HS2/WGC1 Yes 290 Yes 290 SDS2/WGC5 Yes 1200 Yes 1200
Hatfield Town SDS5/Hat1 Yes 1650 Yes 1650 Hat2 No (not Achievable) 1350 No 1350 Yes 1350 HS11/Hat11 Yes 120 Yes 120 Hat19 Yes 20 No 20 Yes 20 20 Hat5 Yes 140 No 140 Yes 140 140
Brookmans Park Large Village Brp1 Yes 100 No 100 Yes 100 100 HS22/BrP4 Yes 250 Yes 250 BrP6 Yes 234 No 234 Yes 234 234 Brp12 Yes 110 No 110 Yes 110 110 HS21/Brp13 Yes 14 Yes 14 HS23/BrP14 Yes 10 Yes 10
Welham Green Large Village WeG1 Yes 10 No 10 Yes 10 10 WeG3 Yes 45 No 45 Yes 45 45 SDS7/WeG4b Yes 80 Yes 80 WeG6 Yes 73 No 73 Yes 73 73 WeG10 Yes 120 No 120 Yes 120 120 WeG12 Yes 59 No 59 Yes 59 59 WeG15 Yes 140 No 140 Yes 140 140
Cuffley Large Village HS27/Cuf1 Yes 30 Yes 30 Cuf4 Yes 220 No 220 Yes 220 220 Cuf5 Yes 440 No 440 Yes 440 440 HS28/Cuf6 Yes 108 Yes 108 HS30/Cuf7 Yes 75 Yes 75 Cuf10 Yes 33 No 33 Yes 33 33 HS29/Cuf12 Yes 73 Yes 73
Welwyn Large Village HS18/Wel11 Yes 30 Yes 30 HS19/Wel4 Yes 30 Yes 30 HS20/Wel3 Yes 7 Yes 7 Wel1 No (Not Achievable) 178 No 178 Yes 178 Wel2 No (Not Achievable) 40 No 40 Yes 40 Wel15 No (Not Achievable) 14 No 14 Yes 14
Woolmer Green Small Village HS15/WGr1 Yes 150 Yes 150 WGr3 Yes 40 No 40 Yes 40 40
Oaklands & Mardley Heath Small Village HS17/OMH5 Yes 20 Yes 20 HS16/OMH8 Yes 5 Yes 5 OMH7 Yes 12 No 12 Yes 12 12
Little Heath Small Village HS24/BrP7 Yes 150 Yes 100 50 Yes 50 50 HS25/LHe1 Yes 35 Yes 35
New Village - Symondshyde SDS6/Hat15 New Village Yes* 1130 Yes 1130
Total 8910 5482 3428 3428 1846 *subject to Transport
Allocated Site Allocated
Not Achievable at HELAA but a Reasonable Alternative in SA Not Allocated Suitable, Available and Achievable at HELAA and a Reasonable Alternative in SA Not Allocated Welwyn Hatfield Local Plan Stage 2 Hearing Statement – Aurora Properties (UK) Ltd
Appendix 5: Aurora Report on Primary School Capacity
15
FM
Room 225 Avanta Harrow Telephone: 0203 3367 2208 79 College Road HARROW Mx HA1 1BD Fax (by appointment) 0208 863 1730 FROM THE DESK OF STEPHEN CLYNE [email protected] [email protected] Direct Line: 07836 540737
!
AN ASSESSMENT OF THE IMPACT ON LOCAL STATE FUNDED PRIMARY SCHOOLS FROM NEW HOMES AT BROOKMANS PARK
1 Brookmans Park is defined by Royal Mail as the residential area identified in the map below.
Brookmans Park
REGISTERED IN ENGLAND & WALES. EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PARTNERSHIP LIMITED REGISTERED OFFICE 4TH FLOOR VENTURE HOUSE 27/29 GLASSHOUSE STREET LONDON W1B 5DF REGISTERED NO. 2502450 FM E 2
1.1 As at July 2015, Royal Mail identified that the area identified consisted of 1,433 residential addresses, an increase of 1 dwelling since March 2011 (National Census). A search of the Welwyn Hatfield Planning website indicates consents totalling 4 houses and 12 apartments. The number of consents implemented indicated by change of address in the Royal Mail Postal Address File is 3 houses and 10 apartments.
1.2 Included in the data capture but not shown on the map is Willow End, Dixons Hill Close, which is a single dwelling, well outside the area, and off Dixons Hill Road in Welham Green and not Brookmans Park (top left hand corner of the map). Also included is Queenswood School Boarding House, which has 210 UK residents.
1.3 The area identified comprises 12 complete Census Output Areas: E00121398, E00121400 – 410 and 6 separate addresses (The Stables, Station Road, 4 addresses on Bulls Lane and Willow End, Dixons Hill Close).
1.4 The population data set out in this note relates solely to the 12 complete output areas.
1.5 The 2011 census, revealed that Brookmans Park consisted 1,409 residential properties of which 1,376 were occupied (97.7% occupancy).
1.6 Bearing in mind the lack of new dwellings in the period since the 2011 census, the breakdown of dwelling type at the Census remains a valid description. The Census shows:
• 870 detached dwellings • 416 semi-detached dwellings • 38 terraced dwellings • 78 purpose built flats and apartments • 7 conversions • 36 commercial premises • 2 temporary/mobile/caravans
2 Population
2.1 2011 Census identifies a Brookmans Park population of 3,884 and an average household size of 2.82 but 210 persons do not live in a household but in a communal establishment. This reduces the average household size to 2.67. The 210 are amongst the 396 boarders at Queenswood School. (It is assumed that the others are non-UK residents and are not counted).
2.2 The population of Brookmans Park aged 0 to 10 (there are none at Queenswood School) at the Census in 2011 was 390 children (of which 287 were of primary school age) and on a clear downward trajectory. In 2015, the number of primary school age children who are resident at Brookmans Park is approximately 230.
FM E 3
Age 0 Age 1 Age 2 Age 3 Age 4 Age 5 Age 6 Age 7 Age 8 Age 9 Age 10 27 23 25 28 35 37 39 50 37 41 48 Brookmans Park Population Census 2011 (Table QS103)
2.3 We are now five years on from the 2011 census: the 6-10 year olds are in secondary school and the 2 – 5 year olds are in the junior classes at a primary school (or preparatory school). Births in the ward 2010-2014 have averaged 46 per annum with 2010 the highest at 52. Brookmans Park is approximately 55% of the ward births.
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 52 49 39 43 46 Births: Brookmans Park and Little Heath Ward (ONS Table VS4)
2.4 The number of births in Brookmans Park as a proportion of ward births has fallen from 90% in 2006 to 55% in 2011.
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Brookmans Park Births 37 39 28 25 23 27 Ward Births 41 39 36 37 52 49 Proportion 90% 90% 78% 68% 44% 55% Births: Proportion of Ward Births
2.5 Births in the ward have fallen slightly in the period from 2011.
2.6 A Freedom of Information request to HCC has identified that at January 2016, 163 of the 310 pupils at Brookmans Park primary school do not live in Brookmans Park (52.5%) and travel into the village from outside locations each day. Therefore only 147 pupils live in the village and attend the primary school. This would indicate that on average there is 21 children per year group (147/7) both living in Brookmans Park and attend Brookmans Park Primary School.
2.7 Of the approximately 230 primary school aged children, resident in Brookmans Park, only 65% attend the village primary school (147 pupils). The remaining 35% go to private preparatory schools (mainly in Potters Bar).
2.8 Based on 1409 residential properties in Brookmans Park and 147 children attending the Primary School represents a pupil yield of 10.43 pupils/100 dwellings.
3 Brookmans Park Primary School
3.1 Brookmans Park Primary School is the sole state funded primary school at Brookmans Park. It is a 1.5 form entry primary school places with a Published Admission Number of 45, which is the FM E 4
number that the School will admit into the Reception Class each year. At January 2016, it had 310 full-time pupils, 5 fewer than the previous year (plus 30 part-time pupils in its nursery).
3.2 As stated above, 147 pupils are resident in Brookmans Park and 163 attend from other locations outside of Brookmans Park. This would suggest that the existing dwellings in Brookmans Park (up to 1409 dwellings including vacant dwellings) require 0.7FE at the primary school to meet all of the present demand from the village.
3.3 Brookmans Park Primary School is a 1.5 form entry school. Primary schools that are not whole forms of entry have of necessity mixed age classes. Premises permitting, in general, primary schools with mixed age classes prefer the simplicity of whole forms of entry. Expansion of Brookmans Park primary school from 1.5FE to 2FE would therefore overcome the present, unpopular, mixed age classes.
3.4 The school site is landlocked and including the entrance drive measures 14,408m2 (Google Earth/MapPoint). Without reducing external recreation and curriculum space (playing field) the school cannot be enlarged. The existing school site area is appropriate for a primary school classified as ‘Village - less sparse’ (DfE classification) of 1.5 form entry capacity. Its site area complies with the national non-statutory area guidelines for mainstream schools (Building Bulleting 103). In an urban setting, the site area would be workable for a 2fe primary school (with nursery class) and compliance could be achieved through the provision of either an all-weather playing field (artificial grass) or an off-site playing field. In those cases the school would be described as being on a ‘constrained or restricted site’. There would be planning permission issues as any loss of school playing field is objected to by Sport England as a statutory consultee. All weather and off-site provisions generally satisfy Sport England, in an urban setting. However, in a semi-rural setting these compromises are often very difficult to deliver.
As an alternative, my client has offered to build a new 2FE primary school on its site (BrP12), which would be on a land area of 2.5ha. The County Council has no objection to this proposal.
4 Additional Housing at Brookmans Park
4.1 With the very low uptake of primary school places from within Brookmans Park, there is a large inflow of pupil traffic each day. The DfE from time to time seeks data from schools as to mode of transport for pupils. The January 2012 Pupil Level Annual School Census asked that question. For Brookmans Park Primary School, with at the time 310 full-time and 30 part-time pupils:
• 120 pupils walked, • more than zero but less than 3 cycled, • none arrived by bus, • more than zero but less than 3 arrived by train, and • 220 arrived by car. FM E 5
4.2 Additional family housing at Brookmans Park would increase the number of children seeking a place at their local primary school. Without enlarging the School, there would be over time a ‘push-back’ of applications historically successful but from outside Brookmans Park. In other words, the number of pupils at the school living somewhere other than Brookmans Park would fall and inter alia the number of cars travelling in and out each day, too, would fall. The existing traffic associated with the primary school is known to be a source of friction between the residents of Bradmore Way, Peplins Way and the school parents/carers who drop off or collect children at the school. Therefore, additional family housing in Brookmans Park would have the beneficial effect of reducing car dependency.
4.3 Alternatively, the School would have to grow in size, which of itself would no doubt please the school but would result in the School outgrowing its current premises. It would require significant housing numbers to move the existing school cohort from 1.5fe to 2fe.
5 Forecasting the Child Yield from New housing
5.1 Brookmans Park is, as a Hertfordshire settlement, atypical. At the 2011 Census, the median age of the population was:
• Hertfordshire 39.5 years • Welwyn Hatfield 37.5 years • Brookmans Park 43.5 years and • Net of Queenswood School residents 45.9 years
5.2 Of an estimated primary school age population of 230, just 152 go to the local primary school. About a third go to independent schools (mainly in Potters Bar).
5.3 Across Hertfordshire, if all children go to a mainstream state funded primary school, migrant households (moving into new dwellings) are tending to generate about a form of entry for every 500 homes (42/100 dwellings). Across the County, this varies between 1.25 forms of entry in Stevenage (53/100 dwellings) and 0.92 forms of entry in East Hertfordshire (39/100 dwellings). Welwyn and Hatfield lies somewhere between the extremes at 1.13 forms of entry from an average local dwelling mix of 500 new homes (47/100 dwellings).
5.4 Brookmans Park, with its distinctive dwelling mix, age profile and lower, and falling, child yield will yield fewer primary school age children than most areas of Hertfordshire. Additionally, up to a third will go into the independent school sector. At present, on the basis that 210 children are required to fill a 1FE school, Brookmans Park only requires a 0.7FE primary school to meet the existing local need (see paragraph 2.8 above).
FM E 6
5.5 The Brookmans Park dwelling mix reflects this. The commercial realities of new housing are that any new market dwellings will reflect the socio-economics of the existing housing. It is therefore reasonable to conclude that, in the longer term, for every 100 new homes in the village, 10.43 pupils of primary school age (see paragraph 2.8 above) would be generated. However, for the reasons given at paragraph 5.6 a higher yield of 14.9 pupils of primary age per 100 market dwellings has been used.
5.6 Migrant households (those moving home address) generally have a different age profile to stock housing – stereotypically characterised as ‘twice the number of 0-4 year olds’. This creates a wave of children, initially primarily pre-school, then primary school, and then secondary school. Again, it is not simple and straightforward because at the same time the child yield from existing stock housing is stereotypically falling, as ‘the stayers’ do not keep having children in perpetuity. Finally, the median age of the existing population of Brookmans Park is significantly older than the District and the County – exacerbated by the history of virtually no dwelling growth. Applying the twice the number of 0-4 year olds to the 10.43 stock child yield produces a forecast child yield of 14.9 children per 100 dwellings, which is appropriate to apply to any market housing added to Brookmans Park.
5.7 Applying the Migrant households assumption to the addition of 500 dwellings to Brookmans Park with a mixture of dwellings: market dwellings reflecting Brookmans Park; affordable dwellings reflecting WHBC policy H7; and the social rent component of the affordable based on Housing Corporation occupancy assumptions produces a child yield for each tenure. For Social Rent dwellings, it forecasts 45 primary school age children per 100 dwellings and for the other affordable tenures, it forecasts an average of 21 primary pupils per 100 dwellings (10.43 x 2) i.e. twice the child yield than stock dwellings. This forecasts a crude 105 additional pupils from 500 homes. A more detailed dwelling tenure mix analysis suggests a figure slightly below this.
Examples showing the impact of changing the balance within the affordable mix are set out below
Tenure Tenure Mix Yield Total Market 70% 350 14.9 52 Affordable Policy H7 30% 150 Social Rent 50 45 23 Shared/Key 100 21 21 Worker/Intermediate/ Starter/etc. 500 96
FM E 7
Tenure Tenure Mix Yield Total Market 70% 350 14.9 52 Affordable Policy H7 30% 150 Social Rent 100 45 45 Shared/Key 50 21 11 Worker/Intermediate/ Starter/etc. 500 108
Tenure Tenure Mix Yield Total Market 70% 350 14.9 52 Affordable Policy H7 30% 150 Social Rent 75 45 34 Shared/Key 75 21 16 Worker/Intermediate/ Starter/etc. 500 102
Explanatory Note: The tables above assume a Policy compliant mix (70% Market and 30% Affordable) for the 500 dwellings. The Affordable dwellings are then tested for the proportion social rent and the balance other affordable tenures. Social rent dwellings are different to all other dwellings as they are allocated on the basis of need whereas all other tenures are based on a mixture of affordability and aspiration. As a consequence the child yield patterns are different. The child yields are as follows: Market dwellings as per Brookmans Park with twice the number of 0-4 year olds factored in for when they go to primary school. (10.43 x 43% uplift = 14.9/100 dw). Social Rent dwellings (assumed mix of sizes x HC occupancy assumptions = 45/100 dw) and Other Affordable dwellings (10.43 x 2 = 21/100 dw).
5.8 All things being equal, Brookmans Park could double its housing over time without the need to increase the size or capacity of the existing primary school, in the longer term. However, over time, this would push-back the 52% of pupils who presently attend Brookmans Park primary school from outside the village.
5.9 However, even applying the Hertfordshire County Council broad average of 500 dwellings per 1FE, the impact of this policy on primary school places in Brookmans Park would be manageable within a 2FE primary school.
5.10 The Tables (below) assess the capacity of Brookmans Park primary school to accommodate new homes within the village. It is important to note that development would be spread over the Plan Period, such that impact would be gradual. Tables 4 and 5 below confirm that Brookmans Park primary school at 1.5FE or 2FE could accommodate all of the new homes identified (768 new homes), on sites found to be suitable, available and deliverable, in the Council’s latest HELAA published in June 2016.
FM E 8
1. School Places Based on 250 New Homes in Brookmans Park
Table 1
3 scenarios: All 250 homes: 70% Market: 30% Affordable: Affordable split 50:50, 25:75 and 75:25.
No.$Homes$ Pupil$Yield Pupil$Numbers$ Existing$Pupils$Resident$in$BP 1409 10.43% 147 Existing$Non@resident$in$BP$ 163 New$Market$Homes$(70%) 175 14.90% 26 New$Affordable$$Homes$(30%)$50%$tenure$split 75 33% $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$25$ Total$New$Homes$ 250 $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$361
No.$Homes$ Pupil$Yield Pupil$Numbers$ Existing$Pupils$Resident$in$BP 1409 10.43% 147 Existing$Non@resident$in$BP 163 New$Market$Homes$(70%) 175 14.90% 26 New$Affordable$$Homes$(30%)$25%$SR$tenure$split 75 27% $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$20$ Total$New$Homes$ 250 $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$356
No.$Homes$ Pupil$Yield Pupil$Numbers$ Existing$Pupils$Resident$in$BP 1409 10.43% 147 Existing$Non@resident$in$BP 163 New$Market$Homes$(70%) 175 14.90% 26 New$Affordable$$Homes$(30%)$75%$SR$tenure$split 75 48% $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$36$ Total$New$Homes$ 250 $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$372
The present school has capacity at 1.5FE for 315 children and with these scenarios new places would be required for between 46 and 62 children if every child went to Brookmans Park Primary or proportionally fewer if the uptake of private school places mirrored the existing proportions. Alternatively, if the primary school remains at 1.5FE, between 49 and 62 (depending upon mix) of the 163 places available for children from outside the village would, over time, not secure a place. This is known as ‘push back’ but would not affect children on roll at the school. As such, 250 new homes in Brookmans Park create a dilemma. The existing 1.5FE school would not cope, without pushing back children from outside the village, but a 2FE would be larger than required to meet the pupil yield from just 250 homes.
If the primary school were extended to 2FE or replaced by a new 2FE school, all children from Brookmans Park would be accommodated plus increased capacity for children from outside the village. The expansion of pupil yield from outside the village would increase car dependency.
FM E 9
2. School Places Based on 500 New Homes in Brookmans Park
Table 2
3 scenarios: All 500 homes: 70% Market: 30% Affordable: Affordable split 50:50, 25:75 and 75:25.
No.$Homes$ Pupil$Yield Pupil$Numbers$ Existing$Pupils$Resident$in$BP 1409 10.43% 147 Existing$Non@resident$in$BP$ 163 New$Market$Homes$(70%) 350 14.90% 52 New$Affordable$$Homes$(30%)$50%$tenure$split 150 33% $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$50$ Total$New$Homes$ 500 $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$412
No.$Homes$ Pupil$Yield Pupil$Numbers$ Existing$Pupils$Resident$in$BP 1409 10.43% 147 Existing$Non@resident$in$BP 163 New$Market$Homes$(70%) 350 14.90% 52 New$Affordable$$Homes$(30%)$25%$SR$tenure$split 150 27% $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$41$ Total$New$Homes$ 500 $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$403
No.$Homes$ Pupil$Yield Pupil$Numbers$ Existing$Pupils$Resident$in$BP 1409 10.43% 147 Existing$Non@resident$in$BP 163 New$Market$Homes$(70%) 350 14.90% 52 New$Affordable$$Homes$(30%)$75%$SR$tenure$split 150 48% $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$72$ Total$New$Homes$ 500 $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$434
The present school has capacity at 1.5FE for 315 children such that new places would be required for between 88 and 119 children (depending upon affordable mix). Alternatively, if the primary school remains at 1.5FE, between 88 and 119 places would not be available to families from outside the village in the future.
If the primary school was extended to 2FE or replaced by a new 2FE school, all children from Brookmans Park would be accommodated plus all of the children from outside the village, except if the affordable mix was made up with 75% social rent when the numbers from outside the village would be reduced by 14.
FM E 10
3. School Places Based on 750 New Homes in Brookmans Park
Table 3
3 scenarios: All 750 homes: 70% Market: 30% Affordable: Affordable split 50:50, 25:75 and 75:25
No.$Homes$ Pupil$Yield Pupil$Numbers$ Existing$Pupils$Resident$in$BP 1409 10.43% 147 Existing$Non@resident$in$BP$ 163 New$Market$Homes$(70%) 525 14.90% 78 New$Affordable$$Homes$(30%)$50%$tenure$split 225 33% $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$74$ Total$New$Homes$ 750 $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$462
No.$Homes$ Pupil$Yield Pupil$Numbers$ Existing$Pupils$Resident$in$BP 1409 10.43% 147 Existing$Non@resident$in$BP 163 New$Market$Homes$(70%) 525 14.90% 78 New$Affordable$$Homes$(30%)$25%$SR$tenure$split 225 27% $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$61$ Total$New$Homes$ 750 $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$449
No.$Homes$ Pupil$Yield Pupil$Numbers$ Existing$Pupils$Resident$in$BP 1409 10.43% 147 Existing$Non@resident$in$BP 163 New$Market$Homes$(70%) 525 14.90% 78 New$Affordable$$Homes$(30%)$75%$SR$tenure$split 225 48% $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$108 Total$New$Homes$ 750 $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$496
The present school has capacity at 1.5FE for 315 children such that new places would be required for between 139 and 186 children. If the primary school remains at 1.5FE, all of the places currently available to applicants from outside the village would, over time, reduce significantly. Depending upon the Affordable mix, the numbers travelling in would reduce to between 24 and zero. If all new dwellings sought a place at the 1.5FE school under one scenario (75% social rent), the number of pupils would exceed the School’s capacity by 18 pupils.
Should the primary school be extended to 2FE or replaced with a new 2FE primary school, the capacity would be 420 children, which would accommodate all of the children from Brookmans Park village with spare capacity for between 87 and 134 children from outside the village, depending upon the Affordable mix.
NOTE: The 12 scenarios (above) are a ‘worst case’ scenario assuming that (a) every new household sends their child to Brookmans Park Primary and none go to a private preparatory school and (b) the long term trend for reducing primary school age pupils arising from the existing stock housing in the village just stops.
FM E 11
4. School Places Based on Sites Which WHBC Found Suitable in its HELAA
The WHBC HELAA published in June 2016 identified the following sites to be suitable, available and deliverable:
BrP1 100 New Homes
BrP4 300 New Homes
BrP6 234 New Homes
BrP12 110 New Homes
BrP13 14 New Homes
BrP14 10 New Homes
Total 768 New Homes
Table 4
Table 4 (same set of scenarios for the affordable dwelling mixes) examines the capacity of a 2FE primary school to accommodate the 768 new homes in the HELAA plus an additional number of pupils from outside the village (green).
No.$Homes$ Pupil$Yield Pupil$Numbers$ Existing$Pupils$Resident$in$BP 1409 10.43% 147 Existing$Non@resident$in$BP$ 117 New$Market$Homes$(70%) 537.6 14.90% 80 New$Affordable$$Homes$(30%)$50%$tenure$split 230.4 33% $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$76$ Total$New$Homes$ 768 $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$420
No.$Homes$ Pupil$Yield Pupil$Numbers$ Existing$Pupils$Resident$in$BP 1409 10.43% 147 Existing$Non@resident$in$BP 131 New$Market$Homes$(70%) 537.6 14.90% 80 New$Affordable$$Homes$(30%)$25%$SR$tenure$split 230.4 27% $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$62$ Total$New$Homes$ 768 $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$420
No.$Homes$ Pupil$Yield Pupil$Numbers$ Existing$Pupils$Resident$in$BP 1409 10.43% 147 Existing$Non@resident$in$BP 82 New$Market$Homes$(70%) 537.6 14.90% 80 New$Affordable$$Homes$(30%)$75%$SR$tenure$split 230.4 48% $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$111 Total$New$Homes$ 768 $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$420 FM E 12
Table 4 demonstrates that a 2FE primary school in Brookmans Park would have capacity to accommodate all existing local children, all new children from 768 new homes, plus a spare capacity to accommodate some children from outside the village.
Table 5
Table 5 (same set of scenarios for the affordable dwelling mixes) examines the capacity of a 1.5FE primary school to accommodate the 768 new homes plus an additional number of pupils from outside the village (green).
No.$Homes$ Pupil$Yield Pupil$Numbers$ Existing$Pupils$Resident$in$BP 1409 10.43% 147 Existing$Non@resident$in$BP$ 12 New$Market$Homes$(70%) 537.6 14.90% 80 New$Affordable$$Homes$(30%)$50%$tenure$split 230.4 33% $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$76$ Total$New$Homes$ 768 $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$315
No.$Homes$ Pupil$Yield Pupil$Numbers$ Existing$Pupils$Resident$in$BP 1409 10.43% 147 Existing$Non@resident$in$BP 26 New$Market$Homes$(70%) 537.6 14.90% 80 New$Affordable$$Homes$(30%)$25%$SR$tenure$split 230.4 27% $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$62$ Total$New$Homes$ 768 $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$315
No.$Homes$ Pupil$Yield Pupil$Numbers$ Existing$Pupils$Resident$in$BP 1409 10.43% 147 Existing$Non@resident$in$BP @23 New$Market$Homes$(70%) 537.6 14.90% 80 New$Affordable$$Homes$(30%)$75%$SR$tenure$split 230.4 48% $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$111 Total$New$Homes$ 768 $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$315
Table 5 demonstrates that the existing 1.5FE primary school in Brookmans Park would have capacity to accommodate all existing local children, all new children from 768 new homes, plus a few children from outside the village (except the third scenario).
6. Conclusions
6.1 Brookmans Park primary school could accommodate the pupil yield from 768 new homes in Brookmans Park without the need for any extension to the 1.5FE primary school unless the FM E 13
proportion of social rent dwellings was very high. However, this would, over time, push back virtually all of the 163 children who attend the primary school but are not resident in Brookmans Park (Table 5).
6.2 If Brookmans Park primary school was expanded to 2FE, or if a new 2FE primary school were built, the primary school would accommodate the pupil yield from 768 new homes with capacity to continue to accommodate most of the applications from outside the village.
6.3 It is clear that whatever child yield is ascribed to new housing at Brookmans Park, relying on the existing primary school capacity, a proposed development of 500 homes could be accommodated at the existing primary school, without school enlargement. It would though over time reduce opportunities for parents not living at Brookmans Park to select the School. But it would not do so by a very wide margin.
6.4 The Brookmans Estate is proposing 110 new homes on BrP12 and 100 new homes on BrP1, with the two sites linked by a new footpath and cycleway which will benefit the whole of the Bell Bar community and reduce car dependency. A new 2FE primary school would be provided as a first phase of development on BrP12.
6.5 The bonuses are: a non-disruptive enlargement, and no additional restriction on the area that the school serves. In other words no reduction in the proportion travelling in. The developer would work with the School on a revised ‘school travel plan’ to reduce where possible the impact of inwards car travel each morning and afternoon.
6.6 The County Council are currently using a countywide ‘rule of thumb’ of 500 homes equates to a need for an additional form of entry. Whilst there are new developments in the County that are producing that level of primary school age children, with a county-wide median age six and a half years younger than Brookmans Park suggests, very strongly, that it will not apply to Brookmans Park. High house prices and young families do not generally co-exist.
6.7 The demographics of Brookmans Park are unlikely to change significantly as a result of new housing development in the village. The affordable rent dwellings will be allocated on the basis of need and they may well be younger households. But that impact will be offset by a larger number of large dwellings where, euphemistically labelled bedrooms are put to other non-child focussed uses. This is because the cost of housing in Brookmans Park is the highest in the Borough and any new housing would maintain that position. The average age of residents (45.9 years) in Brookmans Park would not therefore drop significantly and pupil yield would not therefore rise significantly. Additionally the high uptake of private schooling would be reflected in the high price properties.
6.8 This settlement assessment demonstrates that Brookmans Park could accommodate between 500 and 768 new homes within the capacity of the existing 1.5FE primary school. However, at the higher end, this would over time push back pupil yield from non-residents of FM E 14
Brookmans Park. A 2FE primary school would accommodate between 500 and 768 new homes in the village whilst maintaining capacity (see Tables 2 and 4) to include pupil yield from non- residents of Brookmans Park.
FM
Room 225 Avanta Harrow Telephone: 0203 3367 2208 79 College Road HARROW Mx HA1 1BD Fax (by appointment) 0208 863 1730 FROM THE DESK OF STEPHEN CLYNE [email protected] [email protected] Direct Line: 07836 540737
! 20 October 2016
AN ASSESSMENT OF THE IMPACT ON LOCAL STATE FUNDED PRIMARY SCHOOLS FROM NEW HOMES AT BROOKMANS PARK – ADDENDUM NOTE
1 My briefing note of the 10th September 2016 is unchanged.
2 On the 13th October, Hertfordshire County Council advised that from their January 2016 data they had identified that of the 163 children who travel in to Brookmans Park Primary School 56 live at Welham Green.
3 Two things emerge from this information. a. The numbers are on a rising trend with progressively higher numbers at each younger age (see graph), and
REGISTERED IN ENGLAND & WALES. EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PARTNERSHIP LIMITED REGISTERED OFFICE 4TH FLOOR VENTURE HOUSE 27/29 GLASSHOUSE STREET LONDON W1B 5DF REGISTERED NO. 2502450 FM E 2
b. The likelihood is that available capacity at Brookmans Park Primary School is rising (because of falling pupil numbers arising from an ageing population in the stock housing in Brookmans Park itself).
Uptake of Places at BP Primary by Welham Green Pupils
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0 Age 10 Age 9 Age 8 Age 7 Age 6 Age 5 Age 4
4 There is an intention to provide additional primary school capacity at Welham Green that will reduce the need for pupils to travel out and as a consequence give rise to increased available capacity at Brookmans Park Primary School.
5 Based on the likely yield from new market housing and social housing at Brookmans Park the impact of increased capacity at Welham Green suggests that:
a. With no rising trend of pupils travelling in that Brookmans Park Primary School could absorb the delivery of circa 376 market homes, b. Taking the rising trend into account significantly more, and c. Whilst the percentage of social housing agreed would reduce the headline figure there is, of course, recognition that Brookmans Park Primary School can be enlarged.
6 The table below sets out the following assessment: With a 70:30 market : affordable homes split, the 56 places represents 192 market homes and 82 affordable homes. Thus a capacity for an additional 274 homes without any enlargement of the Brookmans Park Primary School,
FM E 3
Brookmans Park Primary School at 1.5fe (315 places)
Existing Assessment No. Homes Pupil Yield Pupil Numbers Existing BP Pupils Resident in postcodes 1409 10.43% 147 Non-resident (excluding Welham Green) 107 Non-resident (from Welham Green) 56 Existing surplus capacity 5 Total Capacity at 1.5fe 315
Future Assessment of Released Capacity Capacity provided at Welham Green reducing future admissions from Welham Green 56
70% Market Housing 192 14.90% 29 30% Affordable Housing (50% tenure mix) 82 33% 27 Total New Homes 274 56
7 The table above demonstrates that the provision of sufficient primary school capacity at Welham Green could have the effect of reducing the daily inward migration to Brookmans Park Primary School and thus releasing capacity for 274 new homes in Brookmans Park, while retaining the capacity to accommodate the 107 pupils who are non-resident in Brookmans Park, based on the pupil yield assessment above.
8 In the event that Brookmans Park Primary School is expanded to 2fe (420 places), the capacity for new housing in Brookmans Park, without pushing back any of the 107 future applications from non-residents, would be as follows.
Existing Assessment No. Homes Pupil Yield Pupil Numbers Existing BP Pupils Resident in postcodes 1409 10.43% 147 Non-resident (excluding Welham Green) 107 Additional Capacity at 2fe 166
Total School Capacity at 2fe 420
Future Assessment of Released Capacity
70% Market Housing 570 14.90% 85 30% Affordable Housing (50% tenure mix) 244 33% 81 Total New Homes 814 166 Welwyn Hatfield Local Plan Stage 2 Hearing Statement – Aurora Properties (UK) Ltd
Appendix 6: Hogan Lovells Correspondence
16
Welwyn Hatfield Local Plan
Other than as stated below, this document is confidential and prepared solely for your information and that of other beneficiaries of our advice listed in our engagement letter. Therefore you should not, refer to or use our name or this document for any other purpose, disclose them or refer to them in any prospectus or other document, or make them available or communicate them to any other party. If this document contains details of an arrangement that could result in a tax or National Insurance saving, no such conditions of confidentiality apply to the details of that arrangement (for example, for the purpose of discussion with tax authorities). In any event, no other party is entitled to rely on our document for any purpose whatsoever and thus we accept no liability to any other party who is shown or gains access to this document.
© 2017 Deloitte LLP. All rights reserved.
Deloitte LLP is a limited liability partnership registered in England and Wales with registered number OC303675 and its registered office at 2 New Street Square, London EC4A 3BZ, United Kingdom.
Deloitte LLP is the United Kingdom member firm of Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Limited (“DTTL”), a UK private company limited by guarantee, whose member firms are legally separate and independent entities. Please see www.deloitte.co.uk/about for a detailed description of the legal structure of DTTL and its member firms.