PLANNING AND REGULATORY COMMITTEE
26 January 2016
PLANNING APPLICATIONS FOR DETERMINATION
Item 1: 07/15/1102/F
Location: Hoddesdon Town Football Club Lowfield Sports Ground Park View Hoddesdon Hertfordshire EN11 8PX
Description: Erection of a new spectator stand, extension to pay booth and 1.83m high fencing
Applicant: Mr R Merton MBE
Agent: Attfield & Jones
Date Received: 09.11.2015 Date of Committee: 26.01.2016
Officer Contact: Colin Free Expiry Date: 13.01.2016
Ward Councillors: Cllr. Hutchings; Cllr. Rowland; Cllr. Gordon
RECOMMENDED that: planning permission be refused for the reason set out at the end of this report.
1. CONSULTATIONS
1.1 Arboricultural Officer – no objection subject to conditions requiring tree protection measures
2. PUBLICITY
2.1 The application was advertised by means of two site notices erected at the entrance to the football ground and at the southern boundary of the site and 29 individual neighbouring letters. The consultation period expired on 24th December 2015.
3. REPRESENTATIONS
3.1 47 representations have been received from local residents, four supporting the application and the remainder objecting to the proposal. Their concerns are summarised as follows:
In terms of the physical development;
The proposed stand, fencing and turnstile would be visually intrusive and detract from the openness of this parkland setting. The stand would look like a
A1
prison and in combination with the fencing would degrade the overall visual amenity of the locality. The stand and fencing would block the views of the park from Park View. The new stand should be on the west side of the pitch next to the existing stand. The trees on the boundary are already overgrown, ugly and obstruct views – the proposal would make matters worse. The fencing would be a fire hazard and be unstable in high winds. The proposed ‘straightening’ of the boundary fence in the south east corner should not encroach into the open areas of Barclay Park. The proposal is out of character with the residential areas close by.
In terms of the Football Club;
If the football club wants to expand it should relocate away from Barclay Park and unburden the Lowfield site The club is taking over the park – which should be for the enjoyment of all The football played at the park should be amateur only – the bequest of the land was not for professional use This is an unnecessary application as the club has little chance of gaining the promotion it seeks and performance and attendances are falling, not increasing The use and activities at the club are already responsible for noise and anti- social behaviour. The sound system and floodlighting is intrusive on match days and intensification of such activities would be to the further detriment to the amenity of local residents
Traffic and Parking issues;
Increased attendances from the enlarged capacity will lead to more traffic congestion and parking issues locally Illegal on-street parking, parking on pavements and trespass on private land already occurs on match and training days causing conflict with local residents Poor parking prevents use of and safe passage along the pavements by pedestrians, especially those with kids’ buggies and with disabilities
4. RELEVANT LOCAL PLAN POLICIES
4.1 The following policies of the Borough of Broxbourne Local Plan Second Review 2001-2011 (adopted December 2005) apply:
GBC2 Development within the Green Belt GBC16 Landscape Character and Enhancement CLT1 Community, Open Space and Recreational Facilities HD9 Parks and Gardens of Historic Interest HD14 Design Statement on Local Character HD17 Retention / Enhancement of Landscape Features
4.2 The Borough Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG) (August 2004 – updated 2013) is relevant in this case as it provides design guidance for all forms of development.
A2
4.3 The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) 2012 also needs to be considered as it sets out the Government’s planning policies for England and how these are expected to be applied.
5. LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION OF SITE
5.1 The site measuring approximately 0.23 ha, is located to the west of Hoddesdon Town Centre in an area designated as Green Belt land. To the east side of the ground the site is bounded by the through road, Park View, and to the opposite side of the road the development is all residential in nature. To the south and west the Lowfield grounds are adjacent to the Barclay Park Community Open Space and the southern end of the pitch marks the boundary between the two. The western boundary runs behind the stands and clubhouses of the Lowfield site and to the north of the football ground is the cricket pitch. The grounds of Lowfield Sports Ground are surrounded by high, open mesh, security fencing with entrance gates located along Park View. Along the eastern perimeter of the portion of the site accommodating the football pitch, between the entrance and the southern corner of the site, a mature conifer hedge has been planted just within the fence line to provide screening for the pitch. This hedging has reached a height of approximately 5-6m and obscures views into the ground from outside, dependent on the varying density of growth and foliage.
A3
5.2 The football pitch has a low railing, approximately 1 metre high, surrounding the playing area and a stand on the western side of the pitch, close to the single storey club house, which is a shared facility for the cricket and football clubs. On the eastern side of the pitch is a smaller stand, two dugouts, a container for storage and a single turnstile pay booth, at the entrance to the ground. There is no dedicated car parking area for either club at the site. The nearest public car park is located at the southern end of Barclay Park, which is accessed from Cock Lane and is over 250m away. Others are located elsewhere around the town centre.
5.3 The park to the south of the site has an open access from Park View with tarmac paths that branch off in two directions. One pathway extends along the eastern boundary of the park, whilst the other runs close to the southern perimeter fence of the football pitch and slopes downwards to the south western corner, where it continues adjacent to the western side of the pitch before leading down towards an ornamental lake. The pathway leading westwards from the entrance is approximately 2 metres wide, but increases in width to 4 metres wide just inside the entrance. The pathway is lined with mature trees along the section that follows the southern perimeter of the football pitch.
Aerial view of site
A4
Site images
Site entrance in Park View
Eastern boundary of site in Park View
South – east corner of site – boundary with Barclay Park, from Park View
South – east corner of site – boundary with Barclay Park, from within Park
A5
Southern boundary of site with Barclay Park
Western boundary of pitch
Pay booth, storage container, dugouts and stand on eastern side of pitch
6. PROPOSAL
6.1 This application is for the erection of a new spectator stand along the eastern side of the ground, an extension to the pay booth turnstile entrance to the ground, erection of an 1.83m high wooden fence along portions of the south west and south east perimeters of the pitch and a re-alignment of the boundary of the site at its south east corner. This would re-align a length of 2.9m of the boundary fencing up to a depth of 400mm into the adjacent Barclay Park site, thus incorporating an additional area of land of 0.54m2 footprint and triangular in shape inside the Lowfield site boundary. The development is sought to facilitate a move for the club from the existing (Step 5) Spartan South Midlands League Premier Division to (Step 4) Southern League Division 1 Central. The Applicant advises that such a move will necessitate the ground complying with the Football Association’s requirements for a ‘Category E’ ground.
A6
Proposals drawing showing all elements of development (Extended pay booth; new stand; new fencing and alteration of perimeter fence line)
6.2 The application is supported by the inclusion of a Design and Access Statement and design drawings and plans indicating the proposed developments. The application comprises;
1. A 2m long extension to the existing 2m pay booth. This would have the same depth, height and profile of the existing structure and would provide a second turnstile at the entrance to the ground. It would be of brick construct and finished to exactly match the parent structure.
Detail of Proposed Pay Booth Extension
A7
2. A new spectator stand of 8m length, 4m depth and 4m maximum height (pitch side - 3.5m on the Park View Road side of the structure). It would be internally terraced and have a capacity for sheltering up to 50 persons. It would be of coated steel construct and would be located between the pitch and the perimeter of the site to the north of the existing stand and south of the site entrance.
Plan and side elevation of Proposed New Stand
3. The fencing would be of close boarded wooden construct and of a maximum height of 1.83m. Where installed it would be erected at between 1.5 and 4m from the goal line of the pitch, with gates inserted at various points to allow access for lost ball collection. On the west side of the pitch it would extend from the southern edge of the stand to the south-west corner of the pitch, a length of 48m. On the east side of the pitch there would be three sections. The longest would be 46.5m in length, stretching from the southern corner of the existing stand to the south east corner of the pitch. The other sections would be between the existing and new stands (2.6m) and the new stand and the container store near the entrance area to the site (7m).
Elevation of Proposed new Fencing
4. The south east corner land enclosure would require replacement panels of the existing open wire fencing and an additional post to be installed. A8
Details of fence re-alignment proposed for south-east corner of site
Sections of fencing at south east corner of site to be re-located
7. RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY
7.1 7/11/0816/F - change of use of 10m x 75m strip of parkland to playing field/sports ground – withdrawn
7/11/0130/F - erection of a standing only football stand and replacement of turnstile building (Renewal of planning permission 7/0196/08/F/HOD) - conditional approval
7/11/0016/F - extension of existing all weather pitch - withdrawn
7/0196/08/F/HOD - erection of a standing only football stand - conditional approval
7/129/1999 F/HOD – all weather pitch and associated floodlighting - conditional approval
7/155/1996 F/HOD – re-siting & replacement of spectator stand
A9
8. APPRAISAL
8.1 The main issues for consideration in this case are as follows:
i. Principle of the development and its appropriateness in the Green Belt
ii. Design, layout, appearance and impact on amenities of the surrounding Green Belt, townscape and neighbouring residents
iii. Trees and Landscaping
iv. Third Party Objections
Principle of the Development
8.2 The use of this Green Belt site for recreational activity, and the use by the football club, is long established. Green Belt policies allow for the development of new structures providing that they are; “essential small scale facilities associated with outdoor sport”. However the NPPF also requires that development preserves the openness of the Green Belt and does not conflict with the purpose of including land within it.
8.3 The additional stand and extended turnstile would be located close to the eastern perimeter of the site, at the very edge of the Green Belt. Given the existing tree screen on Park Avenue it is not considered that they would detrimentally impact the openness and overall character of the wider Green Belt landscapes other than on a very local basis - close to the site of their development. The proposed close boarded fencing however, by reason of its height, length and solid structure would appear intrusive within this Green Belt setting, having a detrimental effect on the character of the adjacent parkland and the openness of the Green Belt. The applicant submits that the specifications of the FA National Ground Grading Guidelines (Category E section 1.4) render the fencing a necessary boundary treatment for continued use of the ground within the league structure and that this constitutes the ‘very special circumstances’ required under NPPF paragraphs 87 and 88 to render the development acceptable. However there are other requirements within this category which the club has not demonstrated that it is able to meet which undermines the strength of this argument. For example, the stadium must have a minimum capacity of 1,000 (section 1.3) and adequate car parking facilities at or adjacent to the ground (section 1.6). Furthermore, spectator space within the ground would be limited by the FA’s requirement for a fixed pitch perimeter barrier to be erected a minimum of 1.83m from the touchline and goal line. Additional information has been sought from the Applicant regarding compliance with all the FA’s requirements and if received will be verbally reported to the Committee.
8.4 The extension of the curtilage of the site by a depth of less than 0.5m and the enclosure of just over 0.5m2 of the land at Barclay Park would add a minimal footprint of land, just sufficient to provide space to create a pathway around the south eastern corner of the pitch and is not considered likely to detrimentally impact on the character of the parklands to the south and west of the application site, subject to maintaining a suitable means of enclosure. The existing path in Barclay Park would not be reduced in width or encroached upon, although the fencing
A10
would be located closer to the edge of it for the 3m length of the site extension, however, the free and safe flow of visitors to the park would remain unencumbered.
8.5 The principle of the installation of the proposed stand, extended turnstile booth and the minor boundary change within the park is considered acceptable in terms of Green Belt Policy; however the inclusion of the pitch side perimeter fencing in the application renders it unacceptably intrusive and detrimental to the overall openness of this locality. In the absence of conformation that all the requirements of the FA for a Category E ground would be met, it is not considered that the very special circumstances resulting from the FA requirements are sufficient to outweigh the requirements of the NPPF and that therefore the application fails to fulfil national requirements.
Design, layout, appearance and Impact on amenities of the surrounding Green Belt, townscape and neighbouring residents
8.6 The proposed turnstile extension would match the existing structure at the site and the stand would be constructed of coated steel, with the colour and finish constrained by condition to render it visually acceptable. The structure would be located within the site and partly screened by the retained perimeter tree growth so that no material visual harm would be evident.
8.7 With an overall length of 8m and maximum height no greater than 4m, it is not considered that the massing of the stand would create a significantly detrimental impact on the visual amenity of the Green Belt setting of the site or the parklands beyond, when overlooked from Park View and other public viewpoints
8.8 The 1.83m high fencing within the site, along both sides of the pitch would obscure the pitch from casual overlooking from outside the site, as it is designed to do, but as a result it would interrupt enjoyment of the wider aspects and views of and within the park and Green Belt land generally to the detriment of the general amenities of the Park.
8.9 On balance, although the design, layout and appearance of the proposed stand and turnstile extension are not considered likely to be intrusive or detrimental to the townscape of the area it is considered that the proposed close boarded fencing is likely to be detrimental to the openness and character of the adjacent park lands and surrounding Green Belt generally.
Trees and Landscaping
8.10 The turnstile extension, fencing and stand would not require extensive ground works and it is not considered that the root growth of any existing tree specimens would be detrimentally impacted providing that the works are carried out in accord with BS 5837. It is also important that the tree canopy remains substantially intact. Should approval be considered appropriate, it is considered that a condition would be necessary to protect both the roots and the canopy.
A11
Third Party Objections
8.11 The application has been the subject of significant local and wider objection and the details of these are summarised above. Those areas of concern considered material to the determination of the application are appraised within this report.
9. CONCLUSION
9.1 For the reasons set out above, the proposed fencing is inappropriate within the Green Belt and would cause visual harm. Although the Applicant has submitted a case for very special circumstances, it is not considered that those circumstances are sufficient to outweigh the harm caused. For these reasons it is, on balance, recommended that planning permission be refused.
10. RECOMMENDED that: planning permission be refused for the reasons set out below;
1. By reason of its height, length and solid structure the proposed 1.83m, close boarded fencing would fail to preserve the openness of the green belt. The proposal therefore constitutes inappropriate development and the Applicant has failed to demonstrate sufficiently that very special circumstances exist which clearly outweigh this harm, contrary to the Policies GBC2 & GB16 of the Borough of Broxbourne Local Plan Second Review 2001-2011 (December 2005) and the NPPF.
2. By reason of its scale, design and prominence within the established parkland setting, the proposed 1.83m close boarded fencing would cause visual harm to the character and amenity of its surroundings, contrary to Policies GBC16, CLT1, HD9, HD14 and HD17 of the Borough of Broxbourne Local Plan Second Review 2001-2011 (December 2005).
A12
Item 2: 07/15/1105/F
Location: Land between 19 and 32 Doverfield, Goffs Oak, Herts. EN7 5EL
Description: Development of 8 detached 4 bed dwellings with associated car parking and amenity space.
Applicant: Hunter & Stone Developments.
Agent: HTA Design LLP
Date Received: 16.11.15 Date of Committee: 26.01.2016
Expiry Date: 12.1.16 Officer Contact: Gill Forbes
Ward Members: Cllr M Mills-Bishop, Cllr P Moule, Cllr J Pearce
RECOMMENDED that permission be refused for the reasons set out in this report.
1. CONSULTATIONS
1.1 Arboricultural Officer – consultation pending following receipt of additional information. A verbal report will be made to the Committee.
1.2 HCC Highways – consultation pending following receipt of additional information. A verbal report will be made to the Committee.
2. PUBLICITY
2.1 The application has been advertised by means of site notices, newspaper advert and individual letters. The initial consultation period expired 16th December 2015. Further consultation letters were issued to relevant statutory bodies following receipt of additional information. This consultation period expired 14th January 2016.
3. REPRESENTATIONS
3.1 Twenty-eight representations have been received from local residents which are summarised as follows:
Previous applications to build on this land have been rejected and the decision upheld by the Planning Inspectorate; Green Belt land that is rural in character and forms a green wedge which should be protected;
A13
No mention of possible release of this land in Local Plan process and the applicant should not pre-empt the Council’s development proposals in the emerging Local Plan; No ‘very special circumstances’ have arisen to overrule previous opinions; Loss of privacy; Most houses in Doverfield have had subsidence problems, any further piling would cause disturbance; Existing drainage/pumping station will be overloaded; Detrimental to the quality of life of local residents; Likely to be detrimental to health of protected trees; Detrimental to housing values; Loss of views over open countryside; Loss of wildlife habitat; Doverfield is a narrow road which is reduced during the week to single width due to overspill parking from nearby offices etc. Road congestion would be worsened by this proposal.
4. RELEVANT LOCAL PLAN POLICIES
4.1 The following Policies of the Borough of Broxbourne Local Plan Second Review 2001- 2011 (adopted December 2005) apply:
GBC2 Development Within the Green Belt GBC16 Landscape Character Areas and Enhancement GBC20 Protected Species SUS18 Surface Water Drainage HD13 Design Principles HD14 Design Statement on Local Character HD17 Retention Enhancement of Landscape Features HD18 Trees, Hedgerows, and Woodlands H6 Protecting the Amenity of Existing Residential Areas H8 Design Quality of Development H13 Affordable Housing H14 Securing Provision of Affordable Housing T3 Transport and New Development T11 Car parking IMP2 Community and Infrastructure Needs Linked to New Development 4.2 4.2 The Borough Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG) (August 2004, updated 2013) is relevant in this case as it provides design guidance.
4.3 The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (March 2012) is also relevant as it sets out the Government’s planning policies for England and how these are expected to be applied. The chapter of particular relevance in this case is 9 (Protecting Green Belt Land), but chapter 6 (Delivering a Wide Choice of High Quality Homes) is also relevant as well as the aims and objectives of the core policies.
4.4 The Technical Housing Standards – nationally described space standards (March 2015) is also relevant.
A14
5. LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION OF THE SITE
5.1 Doverfield is a residential cul-de-sac that is located off Goffs Lane to the immediate north.
5.2 The application site is open Green Belt land that lies to the south of the highway in Doverfield which terminates in a cul-de-sac. The site, which measures 0.51 hectares, contains a number of protected trees (TPO), including oak, ash and elm, together with native shrubs/hedging consisting of hawthorn, elm and hazel.
5.3 The site is bounded to the immediate north by further open land that lies between Nos. 19 and 32 Doverfield and fronts the highway in Doverfield. The applicant advises that this land is within the same ownership as the land subject of this application.
5.4 The land abuts open undulating grassland to the immediate south with Poyndon Farm located further south. To the east lies Council owned allotments, and to the west are the residential dwellings of Pollards Close whose rear gardens back onto the western boundary of the site.
5.5 There is a pedestrian public footpath (Cheshunt 044) that extends from Cuffley Hill heading south which lies between Pollards Close and runs along the western boundary of the site.
A15
View of site from land to the north off Doverfield
Northern boundary where access would be provided off Doverfield.
A16
6. PROPOSAL
6.1 This is a full application which seeks to erect 8 No. detached four bedroom dwellings with car ports to accommodate two cars and one additional uncovered parking space per dwelling. The proposal would include private amenity space for each dwelling well in excess of the 80 square metres recommended in the SPG for four bedroom houses.
Proposed site layout
A17
Proposed elevation
A18
Proposed floor plan
A19
6.2 Refuse storage and cycle provision are also indicated on the site layout plan below.
Site plan showing relationship with approved scheme for four houses and properties in Pollards Close and position of proposed refuse storage and cycle racks.
6.3 Access to the dwellings would be provided by extending a road from Doverfield which was permitted as part of a previous planning permission for four houses on the northern section of the open land. The road would terminate at a turning head towards the southern end of the proposed development.
A20
Proposed access arrangement at junction with Doverfield
6.4 The application provides details of planted verges to either side of the access road that are proposed to form rain gardens to receive run off from the roofs of the houses, together with any residual surface water from the carriageway. These would be linked to attenuation and storage tanks and then with Theobalds Brook.
6.5 A number of documents have been submitted as part of this application including:
Design and Access Statement Planning Statement TPO Documents Arboricultural Impact Assessment Site Planning History Transport Statement
7. RELEVANT HISTORY
7.1 Permission was granted for the erection of 2 No. three bedroom houses with integral garages, 1 No. four bedroom house with integral garage and 1 No. four bedroom house with detached double garage in 2004 on the land to the immediate north of the application site (reference 7/0438/04/F). Applications to renew this planning permission were submitted and approved in 2010 (reference 7/10/0493/F) and 2013 (reference 7/13/0835/F), although no works appear to have commenced on site. The permission is due to lapse on 17 December 2016.
7.2 An application for tree works to fell a TPO oak tree within the application site was refused permission in 2015. The tree was not considered to be unsafe, diseased or
A21
otherwise defective. It is proposed that this TPO oak tree would be felled, together with a number of others as part of this planning application.
7.3 The site has been promoted for allocation with the Broxbourne Local Plan and is currently being considered through that process.
8. APPRAISAL
8.1 The main issues for consideration in this case are as follows:
i. The principle of development in the Green Belt; ii. The design, layout and appearance of the development; iii. The impact on the amenity of local residents; iv. The impact on highway safety and parking; v. The impact on protected trees and wildlife and vi. Affordable housing and other S106 Planning Obligations.
The Principle of Development
8.2 The site is located within the Metropolitan Green Belt where development is considered inappropriate except in specified circumstances. Policy GBC2 of the Borough of Broxbourne Local Plan states that permission will not be granted for development within the Green Belt other than for the purposes of agriculture, forestry, essential facilities for outdoor sport/recreation, limited extensions/replacement dwellings and other uses of land that preserve the openness of the Green Belt and the purpose of including land within it. The NPPF also identifies residential development of green belt land as inappropriate.
8.3 Inappropriate development is, by definition harmful to the Green Belt and should not be approved except in ‘very special circumstances’. The NPPF states that “When considering any planning application, local planning authorities should ensure that substantial weight is given to any harm to the Green Belt. ‘Very special circumstances’ will not exist unless the potential harm to the Green Belt by reason of inappropriateness, and any other harm, is clearly outweighed by other considerations.”
8.4 The supporting documentation for this proposal includes a Planning Statement in which the following matters are identified by the Applicant as their case for ‘very special circumstances’ to outweigh the harm to the green belt:
i. The site does not contribute to the openness of the Green Belt as it is has distinct natural boundaries which enclose it and prevent clear open views across the land; ii. Openness of the Green Belt in this area is mainly characterised by open field and pasture land; iii. Development of the land would not result in Goffs Oak and the nearest built up area of Crews Hill merging with each other; iv. The land has residential development to the north and west, allotments to the east and the southern boundary is dense with trees so the development would not extend further;
A22
v. Although the 2014 Annual Monitoring Report (AMR) estimates there is a 5.3 year housing supply and housing completions have been low, this site would contribute to the housing need in the Borough; vi. The site is currently privately owned, inaccessible and unmanaged.
These matters will be assessed in turn, below.
8.5 i. The Applicant’s contention that the site does not contribute to the openness of the Green Belt:
Paragraph 79 of the NPPF advises that the fundamental aim of the Green Belt is to prevent urban sprawl by keeping land permanently open. In this regard the term ‘open’ is used to refer to ‘undeveloped’ and the fact that it contains a large number of trees and vegetation does not preclude the land from being an important part of the Green Belt, nor does the fact that it is inaccessible.
8.6 ii. Openness of the Green Belt in this area is mainly characterised by open field and pasture land:
This predominant character of the nearby green belt does not undermine the openness of the application site.
8.7 iii.Development of the land would not result in Goffs Oak and the nearest built up area of Crews Hill merging with each other:
Whilst it is accepted that the proposal complies with the purpose of the green belt to prevent neighbouring towns merging into one another, this does not provide any very special circumstance to justify the development of this site.
8.8 iv.The land has residential development to the north and west, allotments to the east and the southern boundary is dense with trees so the development would not extend further:
Whilst it is agreed that the site sits close to existing residential development (and this results in the degree of harm to the green belt being less that if the site were located in open countryside), the development would still be an encroachment into the countryside. As with regard to point iii above, this matter describes an existing site circumstance which whilst a factor in defining the extent of the harm to the green belt, does not offer very special circumstances for permitting the inappropriate development.
8.9 v. Although the 2014 Annual Monitoring Report (AMR) estimates there is a 5.3 year housing supply and housing completions have been low, this site would contribute to the housing need in the Borough:
Whilst this development would contribute towards the Borough-wide need, it’s contribution of 8 luxury homes would be limited. Within the Council’s need there is a significant need for affordable homes towards which this development makes no contribution.
Furthermore, since the 2014 AMR further large housing developments have been approved at Britannia Nurseries, High Leigh and Oaklands Yard. Therefore, there
A23
are alternative and more appropriate sites available for housing development within the Borough where very special circumstances have been demonstrated. Furthermore, In a Ministerial Statement dated July 2013 the Government emphasised guidance as set out in the NPPF, it states ‘Inappropriate development in the Green Belt should not be approved except in very special circumstances....The secretary of State wishes to make clear that, in considering planning applications, although each case will depend on its facts, he considers that the single issue of unmet demand, whether for traveller sites or for conventional housing, is unlikely to outweigh harm to the Green Belt and other harm to constitute the ‘very special circumstances’ justifying inappropriate development in the Green Belt.’
8.10 vi. The site is currently privately owned, inaccessible and unmanaged.
The above does not provide very special circumstances for permitting inappropriate development. To the contrary, similar statements could apply to large swathes of the green belt.
8.11 Paragraph 80 of the NPPF states that an essential characteristic of Green Belts is their openness and their permanence. The NPPF further identifies the five purposes served by green belts as:
To check the unrestricted sprawl of large built up areas; To prevent neighbourhood town merging into one another; To assist in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment; To preserve the setting and special character of historic towns, and To assist in urban regeneration, by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land.
8.12 Although this land does not serve all five Green Belt functions as listed above it currently provides a green wedge between Pollards Close and Doverfield. The proposed development of 8 houses on this land would neither enhance nor preserve the character of the land which in its current undeveloped state is an important buffer and provides a suitable environment for the TPO trees. The development would permanently reduce the openness of the Green Belt and would encroach into the countryside.
8.13 Although permission has been granted for a small residential development of four houses on Green Belt land to the immediate north of the site, this has the residential dwellings of Nos. 19 and 32 Doverfield to either side of the eastern and western boundaries and although currently screened off from Doverfield, is surrounded at close proximity on three sides by urban development.
8.14 The proposed dwellings would by definition constitute inappropriate development of the green belt. In addition, the development would permanently reduce the openness of the Green Belt. Very special circumstances have not been demonstrated which clearly outweigh this harm and the development is therefore contrary to both the NPPF and Local Plan Policies GBC2, GBC16 or HD17.
A24
Design, layout and Appearance
8.15 The application proposes the erection of eight No. 4 bedroom detached dwellings with double car ports. The layout of the houses would follow a linear route with four either side of the single internal access road. Six of the houses front onto the road, but the dwellings on Plots 7 and 8 are sideways on which may be a response to the location of trees within the site. The road would terminate at a turning head to the south of the site. The housing styles are relatively traditional in form although they are generally larger, and more uniform than dwellings in Doverfield. Although the houses would not be directly visible from Doverfield they are quite large and bulky in appearance for a development that would be on the edge of, and visible from surrounding Green Belt land.
8.16 Details of proposed external finishes have been provided which propose buff/grey multistock bricks at ground floor level with white render and off-white weatherboard at first floor level and terracotta/brown tiles. These materials, particularly the expanse of white render at first floor level, are considered quite stark for this rural setting. Should the proposal be approved, the detail of external finishes would be secured by Condition.
8.17 In the Design and Access Statement it is stated that the development would be surrounded by the existing native hedge that would be reinforced with new planting. However, the plans also show car ports built abutting the boundary which would result in a conflict between the built form and the boundary treatment.
8.18 The overall design and layout of the proposal is not considered compatible with Policies H8, HD13 or HD14 in this Green Belt location.
Impact on Amenity of Existing and Future Residential Occupiers
8.19 The dwelling on Plot 2 is the closest to properties in Pollards Close and there would be approximately 26 metres distance to the nearest dwelling. Although this complies with the SPG which expects a window to window distance of 25 metres to be achieved for two storey properties, there would still be an issue of loss of privacy and overlooking to existing residential gardens. This particularly applies in relation to Plots 1, 2, 3 and 8 where windows of the proposed dwellings would overlook existing private gardens at close proximity. The dwelling on Plot 8 would be only approximately 20 metres from the proposed new build adjacent to the western boundary on the northern parcel of land between Nos. 19 and 32 Doverfield, (with planning permission for four new dwellings). This also does not comply with the SPG privacy standards above.
8.20 Most of the dwellings would have a reasonable outlook, although a distance of only approximately 9.6 metres would be achieved between the front windows of the dwelling on Plot 4 and the flank of the dwelling on Plot 5. This would not comply with the SPG even if no window is included on the flank of the dwelling. At least 12 metres is required between a window of a habitable room and a blank wall to achieve a reasonable outlook.
8.21 The overall internal dimensions of the proposed dwellings comfortably exceed SPG standards whilst each bedroom would also be above the recommended SPG standards. The internal head heights achieve a minimum of 2.5 metres which exceeds SPG standards of 2.3 metres. The eight dwellings would all have private A25
gardens well above the maximum requirements of 100 square metres as set out in the SPG.
8.22 It is proposed that surface water run-off will be prevented through the use of permeable paving for the construction of the main carriageway, private driveways and pathways leading to the front entrances. Planted verges to either side of the carriageway would form rain gardens with a water retention tank under the turning head in the southern part of the site to allow for heavy rainfall events.
8.23 Overall it is considered that the proposal complies with Policy H8 with regard to the impact in terms of window to window distance between existing dwellings in Pollards Close and proposed dwellings. However, there would be issues of overlooking and loss of privacy to residential gardens of existing neighbouring properties. There would also be some issues regarding overlooking, outlook and privacy between occupiers within the site and the previously approved new dwellings to the immediate north.
Highways, Parking and Refuse Storage
8.24 The Transport Statement submitted with this application states that it is proposed to extend the access route which formed part of the application to develop the northern section of the land. The access would be a shared access private road with a total width of 4.8 metres and would have a junction with Doverfield. The existing turning head fronting 28 – 32 Doverfield would be removed.
8.25 The vehicle trip analysis submitted states that the proposed development could generate up to six vehicle movements (two-way) during the AM peak period (8am - 9am), and up to seven vehicle movements (two-way) in the PM peak (5pm -6pm). Given the low level of trips likely to be generated it is considered that there would be no detrimental impact on the surrounding highway network.
8.26 Hertfordshire Highways recommend refusal as insufficient information has been provided with regard to access to the site for larger vehicles, including refuse freighters, the set up at junctions and the proposed installation of pedestrian dropped kerbs (further transport information has now been provided-awaiting response from HCC).
8.29 The proposed dwellings would each be provided with on-site parking for three vehicles, with two in a car port and one open space. This would meet the Council’s parking standard for dwellings with four or more bedrooms.
8.30 Each house would also have a storage area for waste and recycling 2.5 metres wide and 1 metre deep to comply with the Council’s Waste SPG. The refuse storage would be located away from the fronts of the houses.
8.31 Overall, the number of vehicular trips to and from the site would not be sufficient to be detrimental to the local highway network, sufficient on-site parking would be provided, although additional information has been received in response to concerns regarding access.
A26
Trees and Wildlife
8.32 The application site has no public access and is covered with trees and shrubs. The entire site is covered by a Tree Preservation Orders which relate to the group value of trees as well as individual specimens. The species include predominantly oak with 2 hornbeams, 2 ash, 4 goat willow, 2 birch, 4 cypress, 3 elm and native hawthorn, blackthorn and hazel.
8.33 The Arboricultural Impact Assessment submitted by the applicant states that the main trees along the eastern boundary within the site and four mature oaks would have varying degrees of Root Protection Area (RPA) encroachments from the proposal.
8.34 Although the Planning Statement and plans show the removal of one TPO tree is required, the Arboricultural Impact Assessment states that three mature oaks, four goat willow and a number of hawthorn, elm, blackthorn and hazel would be lost to facilitate the development. All of the oaks are described as being in good condition with a life expectancy of over 40 years and a young ash tree with 20 to 40 years. There would also be removal of mixed species, described as smaller self set trees.
8.35 Policy HD18 states that it is necessary for it to be demonstrated that a protected tree or hedgerow is diseased, or that removal is essential for the proper development of a site before consent may be granted. In this instance the Arboricultural Impact Assessment states that the trees, particularly the oaks are in good condition and it has not been proved that there are special circumstances for the development that would justify the removal of TPO trees.
8.36 The proximity of large mature trees to windows within the proposed development is such that, if approved, it is anticipated that there would be requests from future residents to subsequently remove additional TPO trees.
8.37 The mature trees are visible from the street scene and around the locality generally and contribute positively to the appearance of the area.
8.38 No ecology or wildlife appraisal has been provided although it is stated in the Planning Statement that a phase 1 Habitat Survey consisting of a desk top study and site survey were undertaken in 2015. The site was considered to be of low to moderate ecological value with no protected species found. The areas of highest ecological value were considered to be the hedgerows and trees. The applicant states the site is not located in a designated wildlife site and the proposal provides bat and bird boxes and planting to attract wildlife following recommendations of the ecologist. However, no ecological report has been submitted with this application.
8.39 Overall it is considered that the proposal does not comply with Policies HD17 or HD18 as it would result in the loss of protected trees that have a positive contribution to the character and appearance of the area.
A27
Affordable Housing
8.40 Policy H13 of the Local Plan requires that 40% of new homes on sites in excess of 0.5 hectares should be affordable. In this instance it is considered more appropriate for a commuted sum to be negotiated should it be determined that the application should be approved. This could be secured through legal agreement, if planning permission is granted.
Other Matters
8.41 Concerns raised by local residents regarding the potential for drainage and subsidence problems caused by the development are not planning matters.
8.42 Similarly objections in relation to any impact on house prices of existing dwellings is not a material planning consideration.
9. Planning Obligations
9.1 Should the Committee support the proposals it is recommended that the grant of planning permission be subject to the completion of a planning obligation in accordance with Local Plan Policy IMP2. It is considered that the following contribution would be necessary, reasonable and related in scale and kind to the development proposed:
Contribution to Goffs Oak Village Gateway Improvements (east) - £96000 (£3000 X 32 bedrooms); and
The provision of 40% of dwellings as affordable housing or an equivalent commuted sum.
9.2 The applicant has agreed to the principle of a contribution, but the unilateral obligation has not been received.
10. CONCLUSION
10.1 The proposed development would, by definition, be inappropriate within the Green Belt and would result in building on undeveloped land that forms an important buffer to prevent urban sprawl. No ‘very special circumstances’ have been demonstrated. This is contrary to Green Belt Policies in the Local Plan, and the NPPF which states that local planning authorities should give ‘substantial weight’ to any harm to the Green Belt.
10.2 The NPPF contains a presumption in favour of sustainable development and this site is in a sustainable location close to local amenities in and around Goffs Oak. However, significant harm would be caused to the environment, particularly in terms of harm to the green belt and mature established trees and harm would arise from the inadequate levels of amenity for both neighbouring residents and residents of the proposed development. Under such circumstances, the proposal does not deliver sustainable development.
A28
10.3. The good quality protected trees make a positive contribution to the character and appearance of the area and the proposal would have an immediate detrimental impact due to the loss of trees to make way for the development . There would also be likely future harm due to the proximity of the development to the trees which is likely to conflict with future residents enjoyment of their properties.
10.4 The scale, bulk and uniform design of the proposed dwellings would result in a development that would not reflect the characteristics and context of the surrounding area. Also, the design, layout and proximity of the development to existing and proposed new dwellings (that achieved permission in 2013), would be harmful to the amenity of local residents through loss of privacy and overlooking.
10.5 The proposal would involve considerable changes to the highway arrangements for both motorists and pedestrians through the introduction of a new road with a junction in Doverfield and the stopping up of the existing turning head. However, insufficient information regarding highway matters was provided with the application.
RECOMMENDED that planning permission be refused for the following reasons:
1. The proposed development is contrary to Policy GBC2 of the Borough of Broxbourne Local Plan Second Review 2001-2011 (December 2005) as it constitutes inappropriate development in the green belt and reduces the openness of the green belt without very special circumstances which clearly outweigh this harm.
2. The proposed development is contrary to Policies H13 and H14 of the Borough of Broxbourne Local Plan Second Review 2001-2011 (December 2005), as it fails to provide for the delivery of affordable housing.
3. The proposed development is contrary to Policies HD17, HD18, and GBC16 as it would result in the loss of TPO trees and would potentially threaten the longer term protection of remaining protected trees due to their close proximity with proposed dwellings.
4. The proposed development is contrary to Policies HD13, HD14, and H8 of the Borough of Broxbourne Local Plan Second Review 2001-2011 (December 2005), as the size, scale, bulk and overall appearance of the proposed dwellings would not reflect, or relate to the characteristics and context of the surrounding area.
5. The proposed development is contrary to Policies H6 and H8 of the Borough of Broxbourne Local Plan Second Review 2001-2011 (December 2005), as the proposed layout and design of the dwellings would result in overlooking and loss of privacy to occupiers of existing, and future occupiers of proposed neighbouring dwellings.
6. The proposed development is contrary to Policy T3 of the Borough of Broxbourne Local Plan Second Review 2001-2011 (December 2005) as insufficient information has been provided with respect to vehicle and pedestrian access arrangements onto Doverfield.
A29
Item 3: 07/15/0970/F
Location: Rear of 40 Park Lane Waltham Cross EN8 8BE
Description: Hybrid planning application (part full, part outline) for redevelopment of rear of 40 Park Lane to provide 10 no. dwellings (6 no. three bed and 4 no. two bed). Part outline application with matters reserved for redevelopment of 40 Park Lane to provide 2 no. dwelling units
Applicant: FineFirst Ltd
Agent: DWW Design
Date Received: 14.10.2015 Date of Committee: 26.01.2016
Officer Contact: Colin Free Expiry Date: 13.01.2016
Ward Councillors: Cllr. Aitken; Cllr. Harvey; Cllr. Bowman
RECOMMENDED that: planning permission be granted subject to the conditions at the end of this report and the applicant first completing a planning obligation under s.106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) for the terms set out in this report.
1. CONSULTATIONS
1.1 HCC Highways – no objection subject to conditions ensuring improvements to the access to the site.
1.2 HCC Education – no objection
1.3 HCC Waste and Mineral – no objections
1.4 HCC Flood Management – no objection subject to conditions ensuring implementation of SuDS strategy
1.5 Environment Agency – no comments
1.6 Environmental Health – no objection subject to the imposition of conditions relating to land contamination investigations and remediation
1.7 NHS (Herts) – no comments
A30
2. PUBLICITY
2.1 The application was advertised by means of a site notice and 51 individual neighbouring letters. The consultation period expired on 19th November 2015.
2.2 Revised proposals were sought and received following initial assessment of the application. Re-consultation was carried out with parties expressing initial interest.
3. REPRESENTATIONS
3.1 One representation has been received from a local resident, objecting to the proposal. Their concerns are summarised as follows:
The nearest proposed dwelling would be situated approximately 1m from the shared boundary with a listed property – it would be imposing and located too close to the heritage building; The whole development would be detrimental to the character and heritage of the locally listed buildings at 32-40 Park Lane and to the Grade 2 Listed No’s 28 and 30; The flank and boundary wall would impact on the outlook from north facing windows at No.28; The design of the development needs to be improved to match the existing character of the area
3.2 The above objections were re-iterated following further consultation in regard to the amended design
4. RELEVANT LOCAL PLAN POLICIES
4.4 The following policies of the Borough of Broxbourne Local Plan Second Review 2001-2011 (adopted December 2005) apply:
SUS12 Development on Contaminated Land SUS18 Surface Water Drainage EMP6 Local Employment Sites H2 Maximising the Development Potential of Sites H8 Design Quality of Development H12 Housing mix H13 Affordable Housing HD6 Other Development Affecting A Listed Building and Its Curtilage HD13 Design Principles HD14 Design Statement on Local Character T3 Transport & New Development T10 Cycling Provision T11 Car Parking IMP2 Community & Infrastructure needs linked to new development
4.5 The Borough Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG) (August 2004 – updated 2013) is relevant in this case as it provides design guidance for all forms of development.
A31
4.6 The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) 2012 also needs to be considered as it sets out the Government’s planning policies for England and how these are expected to be applied.
5. LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION OF SITE
5.1 The site is located on the north side of Park Lane in Waltham Cross. No.40 is a locally listed dwelling which has lain derelict for some considerable period of time previously and is in a very poor state of repair. To the west side of No.40 an access road leads through to the site of the proposed new development. This comprises a portion of land bounded by the rear gardens of properties in Park Lane (No’s 26c - 48), Leven Drive (No’s 105-111), Ruthven Avenue (No’s 2-10) and the side and rear gardens of No’s 9 & 10 Stoneleigh Drive.
5.2 The site is irregular in shape, measuring approximately 30m from north to south and 75m from east to west; its footprint covers approximately 0.26 hectares in total.
5.3 The site is in use as a yard for parking, storing and repair and renovation of motor vehicles, including an MOT station and additionally for sales of vehicles from the site. These uses have been established for up to, and in excess of, approximately forty years.
5.4 Within the site there is a complex of single storey buildings, of mixed sized footprints and in varying states of repair, these serve the motor trade related uses of the site. There are also various and considerable areas of concrete hardstanding and other hard surfacing covering a large proportion of the site to provide manoeuvring, parking and storage areas within the site.
5.5 No. 40 is a two and a half storey structure of Georgian townhouse style with a double apex roof. Various later additions and alterations are evident in the structure, which forms the end property of a terrace of five locally listed dwellings along this stretch of road. Unlike its neighbours, the property is not in residential use currently and there are indications of disrepair and a general lack of structural integrity which may to render it uninhabitable without extensive prior renovation.
5.6 The Grade 2 Listed, semi-detached, dwellings 28 and 30 Park Lane are located immediately to the south of the site. The converted garage of No.30 immediately abounds the southern boundary of the application site and its flank wall forms part of the boundary of the site.
A32
Site Location
Aerial view of site
A33
Site images:
No. 40 and Park Lane entrance to site
Rear of No.40 and access route to site
Main workshop on-site and MOT Station
View east across site from entrance
A34
View west across site towards rear gardens of Park Lane (left) and Leven Drive (right)
View south and east across site towards rear of properties in Park Lane
View south from site toward rear of 26c, 28 & 30 Park Lane
West side of site showing rear and side of properties in Leven Drive
A35
East side of site, view north and east towards rear of dwellings in Ruthern Avenue and No.9 Stoneleigh Close
6. PROPOSAL
6.1 This is a hybrid application which seeks consent to demolish and clear the site of the established structures and associated business uses at the site and to establish a new residential development of ten houses. Six would be of three bedroom capacity and two and a half storey height and the remaining four would be two storeys, with two bedroom accommodation. Additionally the application seeks outline permission for renovation of No.40 and to convert the property to provide two apartment dwellings at the site. It is proposed that the original structure will be retained, subject to structural survey and feasibility study, and no material changes to the existing bulk and massing are proposed.
6.2 Safe access / egress would be maintained off Park Lane by the improvement of the existing crossover and an internal access road layout which would lead to each dwelling and the allocated parking areas, comprising of twenty on-site spaces. It is proposed that all on-site service roads and pathways would be constructed to ensure on-site drainage and additional soft landscaped areas would further enhance the sustainable urban drainage capacity of the site.
6.3 All dwellings would be provided with external structures for cycle and recycling and waste storage. Pathways are routed to allow all waste collection points to be sited at the front of each property.
6.4 The application is supported by the following documents:
Design and Access Statement Planning Statement BS5837 Tree Study, Arboriculture Impact Assessment and Method Statement Preliminary Risk Assessment Document (Geology, Hydrogeology and Hydrology) Sustainable Drainage Strategy
7. RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY
7.1 07/09/0153/O - Outline application for demolition of existing garages/workshop and erection of 8 semi-detached three bed houses and one detached four bed house – Withdrawn (not determined). This application was made by Broxbourne Borough Council in order to expedite the redevelopment of the site and had been resolved for approval. The application was withdrawn by the Council because it was unable to create a S106 agreement with itself.
A36
7/257/1979 - Single storey extension to D.O.T Vehicle Testing Bay - conditional approval
8. APPRAISAL
8.1 The main issues for consideration in this case are as follows:
i. Principle of the development ii. Loss of Employment Activity iii. Design, layout, and appearance iv. Residential Amenity v. Highways/Parking vi. Drainage and Flood Risk vii. Trees and Landscaping viii. Impact on Setting of Listed and Locally Listed Buildings ix. Outline redevelopment of 40 Park Lane to provide two dwelling units x. Other matters (Third Party Objections) xi. Affordable Housing; and Planning Obligations
Principle of the development
8.2 The site has been identified by the Council as having potential for residential development of up to ten dwellings in the Council Strategic Housing Land Availability Document (SHLAA. August 2010).
8.3 The site is located within the envelope of established local residential development and is within a short walking distance of Waltham Cross town centre, its bus and train stations and other important local transport links, including the A10 and the M25. The area falls within the Borough Accessibility Corridor and outside the Metropolitan Green Belt.
8.4 There is a recognised need for starter sized family housing within the Borough; the delivery of the development proposed through this application would make a valuable contribution to fulfilling that need.
8.5 The application also seeks outline consent for the refurbishment of No.40 Park Lane to provide residential accommodation for two dwellings. At present the building forms the end property of a row of five locally listed properties, the others of which are all in full residential occupation. The renovation of this structure and its return to full use for residential occupation would be seen as a positive process in the life of the building, which is currently slipping toward dereliction and decay.
8.6 The principle of the re-development of the site and of No. 40 Park Lane for residential use is acceptable.
A37
Loss of Employment Activity
8.7 The site is currently occupied by a car repair workshop and for the storage of vehicles. The regular level of employment at the site appears to comprise no more than five full time employees, including the proprietor, although only three members of staff were evident on officer site visit. The applicant submits that the current commercial environment is likely to render the premises uneconomic to continue and overly expensive to remain appropriately insured. It is also submitted that the MOT licence is unlikely to be renewed when the existing period of operation expires, again as a result of the overbearing financial demands of maintaining the service.
8.8 Policy EMP6 of the Local Plan seeks to retain existing local employment sites except where the applicant can demonstrate that there is environmental harm from the continued use; or that there is no effective demand for the premises or reasonable prospect of re-development to modern standards; or that the proposed re-development would provide essential community benefits. It is officer opinion that that the site is constrained in terms of its economic activity and potential, as intensification of the current uses would likely result in conflict with the amenities of surrounding residents and degradation of the environment of the site and its surroundings generally. The applicant submits that maintaining the current levels of activity is not an option, as the site is currently economically unsustainable.
8.9 On balance, it is not considered that the loss of the current employment levels and activities undertaken at this site would be detrimental to the overall vitality of the economy of the Borough and that the development for residential use would be in accord with the aims and objectives of Policy EMP6. The proposed residential occupation would be in alignment with the surrounding residential vernacular and would provide the community benefit of additional residential accommodation in the area.
Design, layout and appearance
8.10 The site layout would comprise of a central access route running from the existing Park Lane access point and ending in a ‘T’ junction cul-de-sac which would provide capability for large delivery and service vehicles to turn within the site and re-enter Park Lane in a forward gear. To the west of the access route would be located two pairs of staggered, semi-detached dwellings; Plots 1 & 2 would be two and a half storey and of three bedroom accommodation and Plots 3 & 4 would be two storey and of two bedroom capacity. On the east side of the site would run a terrace of six dwellings (Plots 5 – 10), orientated on a north-south access and comprising of four of the three bedroom dwellings (Plots 5 – 8) and two of the two bed design (Plots 9 & 10).
A38
Proposed Layout of Development
8.11 The properties would be comprised of two designs of terraced townhouse. One would be two bedroomed and two storeys in height and the other would be three bedroomed and two and a half storeys high. Both forms would be contemporary in style and would use red and yellow stock brickwork, with grey slate style roofing, to complement the vernacular of the surrounding area.
A39
Front and rear elevations of terrace showing both forms of development at site
3D Sketch – front of terrace
3D sketch - rear of terrace
A40
8.12 The general appearance of the buildings would be balanced, with window layouts of a symmetrical design. The footprint of the three bedroom dwelling would be only marginally larger, at 48.5m2, than those of the two bedroom dwellings which would be 45.5m2. The main roof pitches of each design would be similar, although the three bedroomed homes would have small dormer inserts front and rear to allow for accommodation of the third bedroom in the roof spaces and the two bedroom properties would have rear spur roof designs to reduce the overall volume of roofspace created.
South and North Elevations of terrace illustrating roof pitches, spurs and dormers
3D sketch of southern end of terrace
8.13 Overall it is considered that the scheme of the proposed development would be complementary to the local setting and would make sustainable and effective use of this location in terms of layout, scale and design, in accord with the provisions of Policies H2 and HD14. A41
Residential Amenity
8.14 The internal living accommodation of the dwellings would meet and exceed all Council and national space standards in all terms of requirement - internal amenity space, bedroom sizes and bathroom accommodation.
8.15 External garden spaces exceed minimum Council SPG standards and adequate provision is also made in these areas for the storage of waste and recycling bins and also cycle sheds. The front gardens are limited in size but provide some soft landscaping between the dwelling and the road / parking areas but the rear gardens provide adequate private outdoor living space for the benefit of prospective residents.
8.16 The site is located beyond the rear boundaries of all surrounding residential dwellings and no surrounding homes would suffer any material losses of daylight, outlook or amenity. No overlooking or privacy issues would be created as none of the proposed structures would have windows located sufficiently close to have material overlooking of surrounding residencies.
8.17 Generally, the cessation of the disturbances and adverse effects created by the existing activities at the site would enhance the amenity and outlook of residents surrounding the site and the creation of residential space and soft landscaping at the site would generally improve the local environment. Whilst the introduction of buildings of greater than single storey height may interrupt long distance overviews of neighbours, there would be no material effects of blocking light, outlook or amenity at any adjacent properties when adjudged under the Council Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG). Even the closest properties to the structures of the site, No’s 28 and 30 Park Lane would not have habitable windows situated within 14m of a flank wall of the nearest proposed dwelling (Plot 10) and no potential overlooking or privacy issues would be likely to occur.
8.18 There would be no materially adverse effects to future residents or to existing neighbours to the site resulting from the establishment of residential accommodation at this site.
Highways & Parking
8.19 The site would be accessed via an improved junction onto Park Lane. Detail of this would be ensured by condition. The internal estate road would provide adequate access to parking for all the dwellings and parking proposed. All vehicles visiting the site would be able to enter and leave in a forward gear.
8.20 Normal application of the parking guidelines would require that this development should contain 27 spaces. However, the site lies within the accessibility corridor meaning that the Council has discretion to apply a 25% reduction on this total. Given that the site is located close to the town centre of Waltham Cross with good links to public transport connections, it is considered that this reduction is merited, resulting in a need for 21 spaces. The number indicated is 23 in total and this is considered acceptable subject to a parking allocation strategy which is recommended by condition.
A42
8.21 Turning for delivery and service vehicles would be achievable at the hammerhead of the site and waste collection would be possible without operatives having the need to collect waste from any further than 25m from anywhere within the site.
8.22 Each property would be provided with an on-site waste storage area and be provided with pathway access to a collection point at the front of each site, so that collection operatives would not need to enter the properties to collect refuse. Cycle store sheds are proposed for each dwelling in accord with Council SPG requirements.
8.23 HCC Highways do not object to the proposal subject to the application of suitable conditions. These conditions are not considered onerous and are recommended for inclusion in any consent granted to this application. Details are included in the final section of this report
8.24 The proposed access/egress provisions are considered acceptable and on- site provision of parking, manoeuvring spaces and turning, cycle and refuse storage and collection meet Council standards and policy requirements.
Drainage and Flood Risk
8.25 The site does not fall within any Flood Zone designation area and there is no local record of flooding at the site specifically. The submitted Sustainable Drainage Strategy document details that the entire site will be drainage managed in a sustainable manner with the road, walkways and parking areas permeably surfaced for on-site drainage and green landscaping forming the remainder of the site. The roofs of the dwellings will drain to water butts which would overflow to the on-site soakaways. No area of the site would remain covered in impermeable concrete, as is presently the case, and all natural run-off would be allowed to drain on-site. Implementation of these proposals would be secured by condition.
A43
Details of on-site drainage proposals
Trees, Landscaping and Environmental Quality
8.26 There are no protected trees within the site and landscaping and re-planting schemes are contained within the proposal documentation. Details are included for protection of the root growth of mature specimens around the perimeter of the site, in accordance with BS 5837 (Trees in relation to design, demolition and construction) and details of such growth as required to be removed to facilitate development has been provided. Generally, it is considered that as a result of the soils renovation, removal of excessive hardstanding and the landscaping and planting proposals of the site which are proposed, the proposed development would result in a net improvement in the overall ecological quality of the site, post development.
A44
Proposed Landscaping Scheme
8.27 The current use of the site has created a likely potential for contamination from fuel, oils and solvents etc., and some of the structures are likely to have a presence of asbestos. The Council Environmental Health Service has recommended that site investigations are undertaken prior to any development commencing. A condition is therefore recommended requiring this work to be carried out and for any recommended mitigation measures to be completed prior to the commencement of any works.
Impact on Setting of Listed and Locally Listed Buildings
8.28 The Council’s Historical Building and Conservation consultant (BEAMS) has confirmed that it does not consider that the development would exert an undue influence on the setting and character of the Grade 2 listed properties, No’s 28 and 30 Park Lane, as the proposed development is to the north of these sites, beyond the rear boundaries of those properties. The historical and architectural fabric and interest of these buildings is centred on the original dwellings located at the southern end of these sites, adjacent to Park Lane, and the single storey outhouses at the northern end of the sites would not be unduly influenced by the proposed development. The design and siting of the proposed two bedroom properties proposed at the rear of these sites have been specifically intended to minimise visual disturbance to the setting of the listed buildings. A45
Outline redevelopment of 40 Park Lane to provide two dwelling units
8.29 The application also contains a proposal to redevelop No.40 Park Lane to provide two residential dwellings. Currently the building is sealed against intrusion and a full structural survey has not yet been undertaken. It is proposed that the outline and shell of the building would not be significantly altered during the refurbishment and that the two dwellings proposed would be in the nature of flatted apartments. The site would retain existing amenity space at the rear of the site and two on-site parking spaces would also be created in this area. It is considered reasonable and necessary that further details of this proposal are provided prior to commencement of any other development of the land to the rear of the site to ensure compliance with Policy HD15 (Comprehensive Approach to Urban Regeneration) and it would be required by condition in any approval granted that the redevelopment of this property shall occur in concurrence with all other proposed development.
Other Matters (Third Party Objection)
8.30 One representation has been received offering objection to the proposal which cites the following as reasons to refuse the scheme:
At 1m from the common boundary the nearest proposed dwelling (Plot 10) would be too close to the rear of the properties 28 and 30 Park Lane and would exert a detrimental influence on the setting and character of the Grade 2 listed properties at those addresses. The proposed development would obscure outlook from the blocked in windows of the garage at the rear of No’s 28 and 30 Park Lane and prevent their potential for habitable use, should this be required in the future.
8.31 It is not considered that the development would affect No’s 28 and 30 Park Lane to the detriment of their historical character and setting. No part of the proposed development is contrary to policy guidance and it would not materially deprive the properties of any daylight availability or outlook. The blocked windows facing north into the site at the rear of No.28 are unlikely to become an issue as these are located in the flank wall of the former stable / garage of the property at No.28 Park Lane and a window opening for this space has now been created in the front facing eastern elevation of this property. It is not envisaged that the north facing window frame would be required for use at any future time. There are no structures or openings at 30 Park Lane which would experience similar issues. Overall it is considered that the establishment of residential use on the site to the rear of these grade 2 listed dwellings would be more enhancing to their setting than is the current light industrial and vehicle storage uses currently in operation at the site.
Planning Obligations/Affordable Housing
8.32 Local Plan Policy IMP2 states that the Council will seek planning obligations where they are appropriate. When seeking a planning obligation, the Council will also ensure that the obligations sought meet the tests set out in the National Planning Policy Guidance and are lawful under the CIL Regulations 2010.
A46
8.33 In accordance with the Council’s standard practice, a sum of £3,000 per bedroom within the development has been sought towards the provision of community infrastructure, to offset the additional burden of future residents accessing services. The contribution would be dedicated towards the Waltham Cross Town Centre Gateway Improvements project.
8.34 A signed unilateral agreement is yet to be lodged with the Council, however, the agent has signalled that the agreement is being processed and it is anticipated that its receipt may be verbally reported to the Committee.
9. CONCLUSION
9.1 The proposed development would make an appropriate use of this brownfield site which is currently under-utilised and is in use for activities no longer considered appropriate at this site. The development would allow remediation of potential contaminants from the site and deliver housing of a quality and design appropriate to its locality whilst contributing to the identified needs of the Borough. Other matters of highway access, layout and landscaping have been addressed to the satisfaction of officers or can be addressed by the use of appropriate conditions to render it otherwise appropriate in planning terms. Subject to receipt of a signed unilateral undertaking agreement, the scheme is recommended for approval.
10. RECOMMENDED that: planning permission be granted subject to the conditions set out below and the applicant first completing a planning obligation under s.106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) for the terms set out in this report
With Respect to Development at Rear of No.40;
1) GEN01A Standard Time Limit – 3 years 2) GEN07 Development in Accordance With Numbered Plans 3) GEN13 Approval of Materials 4) GEN14 Approval of Surfacing Materials 5) GEN15 Details of Boundary walls and fences 6) RES01 Permitted Development Rights Withdrawn (Class A, B & E) 7) RES06 Parking Allocation Strategy to be Submitted and Approved Prior to Development and Areas to be Maintained Thereafter 8) RES07 Completion before Occupation (estates) 9) RES011 Private Vehicles only (Parking Spaces) 10) NONSTD Details of proposed re-development of No.40 Park Lane to be submitted and approved prior to any development and undertaken in concurrence with redevelopment of site to rear 11) NONSTD Tree protections measures in accordance with BS5837 and Landscaping scheme to be implemented prior to first occupation 12) NONSTD No development prior to approval of Construction and Traffic Management Plans (details to include proposal for hours of work, measures to reduce dirt and dust emissions and prevent transfer of mud off site and details of transport and parking for site workers 13) NONSTD (Highways) - No development prior to completion of New Access
A47
14) NONSTD (Highways) - Completion of footway across the front of No.40 Park Lane prior to commencement of development 15) NONSTD (Highways) - No occupation before completion of surfacing and on-site access 16) NONSTD (EH) No development prior to approval of Site Investigation and Remediation scheme – to be implemented on approval 17) NONSTD (HCC Flood Risk) – Further details of SuDS to be submitted and approved and to be implemented in accordance with submitted drainage strategy thereafter
With Respect to Redevelopment of No.40
1) NONSTD - Details of Outline proposals for re-development of No.40 Park Lane to be submitted and approved prior to any development and undertaken in concurrence with redevelopment of site to rear 2) NONSTD (Highways) - Completion of footway across the front of No.40 Park Lane prior to commencement of development 3) GEN15 - Details of Boundary walls and fences 4) RES06 - Parking allocation to be submitted and approved prior to development and areas to be maintained thereafter 5) NONSTD (Highways) - Completion of footway across the front of No.40 Park Lane prior to commencement of development 6) NONSTD (Highways) - No occupation before completion of surfacing and on-site access
A48
Item 4: 07/15/0866/F
Location: Land at Cock Lane adjacent to the A10, Hoddesdon, Herts, EN11 8LS
Description: Erection of a ground-mounted solar photovoltaic array and associated infrastructure
Applicant: Mulbrick Clean Energy LLP
Agent: Green Cat Renewables
Date Received: 15.09.2015 Date of Committee: 15.12.2015
Officer Contact: Peter Quaile Expiry Date: 15.12.2015
Ward Councillors: Councillors Gordon, Hutchings and Rowland
SUPPLEMENTARY REPORT
1. This application was presented to the Planning and Regulatory Committee in December 2015 when it was deferred in order to obtain further information on the following matters:
A. Environmental impact B. Flood risk and drainage C. The impact on the landfill site and potential for increased pollution from this development D. The lack of local community benefits arising from this Green Belt proposal
2. The issue of public consultation was also aired at the previous meeting. The statutory requirement in relation to consultation on a Major application is a notice in the local newspaper and either a site notice or letters to neighbours. In this instance, in line with the Council’s normal practice, a newspaper notice was published, a site notice posted on Cock Lane and letters sent to residents on Cock Lane along with the occupier of Herts Golf Club, business occupiers and residents of the mews. No letters have been received in response to the consultation.
3. Since the previous presentation the Council has been back in contact with Herts County Council which is the mineral and waste authority and has written to the applicant requesting that they clarify the benefits and impacts of their current proposal. The County Council has responded with details of the landfill site and their comments on the potential impact of this application are summarised as follows:
The site was a mixed landfill operation which was designed with containment for the refuse with engineered clay cells, a water-tight sealing cap of 50cm of clay and at least a metre depth of soil on the top including sub-soil and 20-30cm of top soil. It was restored by mid-1991 and additional drainage installed in 1994. The integrity of the cap is important to prevent water ingress to the landfill mass and no damage
A49
should be caused to the network of pipes which take landfill gas to the on-site gas flare. Any drainage works and cable runs would need to take account of the above limitations. The landfill will continue to settle but this is a matter for the applicant to resolve. Trial pits dug in 1994 in a few locations revealed 80-90cm of sub-soil and 20-30cm of topsoil. There was a landslip on the western side in early 1991 which related to the topsoil layer.
4. It is clear from the above that the County Council does not object to the principle of this development as mineral and waste authority. Conditions are proposed at the bottom of this report to cover environmental management of the site throughout its operational life. Also, the County Council as lead local flood authority has previously written to agree the detailed flood risk assessment submitted by the applicant. Again, this would be subject to fine detail controlled by condition in relation to the design, implementation and operation and would include details of any excavation or alteration to ground levels which could have an impact on the landfill cap and covering soil. Subject to these conditions it is considered that the proposal would not add to or affect pollution on and around this site and would have an acceptable impact on surface water drainage/flooding on this site which is not designated as a flood zone by the Environment Agency. To the contrary, the main benefit of this proposal is the environmental benefit of the generation of renewable energy.
5. The applicant has submitted a briefing paper which aims to summarise the important planning issues from their perspective and which seeks to clarify matters raised by the Committee. The information note, which provides comments under its headings a-f, is summarised below and is reproduced in full as an appendix to this report.
a) In relation to environmental impact, the note emphasises the comprehensive range of reports submitted with the application and sets out, from the applicant’s perspective, the national and local policy implications of this proposed development in the Green Belt. In particular it focusses on the acceptable appearance and general impact of the solar PV farm and on its compliance with the NPPF.
b&c) The acceptability of the scheme to Herts County Council (which is the statutory body controlling surface water flood risk) is highlighted in this section as well as the minimal additional run-off produced by the installation. It confirms that any infiltration would take place on the access track outside the area occupied by landfill.
d) The applicant acknowledges the challenges of developing on a landfill site noting that it is more than 20 years since the tip was closed and capped and that full consideration has been given to the proposal in order to minimise the depth of excavation and consequent impact on the protective capping layers. The applicant emphasises that best practice would be followed in erecting the facility.
e) The installation would not, via its installation or operation, cause additional pollution. At decommissioning after 25 years, the site would be entirely cleared leaving no visible trace of the solar PV installation. With bio-diversity enhancement, the site would be in an improved condition when compared to the
A50
existing situation. To ensure that this objective is achieved it is now proposed to include a condition limiting the use to 25 years which provides an end-stop so that the Council retains long term planning control of the site.
f) Finally, with regard to community benefits which would flow from this scheme, the applicant has confirmed that educational outreach can be offered to local schools and colleges. This could include site visits for students and open days along with potential tie-up with local apprenticeship schemes. This educational programme has yet to be drawn up in detail and the applicant is… “willing to consider any options in order to ensure the development has a long lasting benefit to the site as well as the community.” The imposition of a planning condition is recommended as a mechanism to secure an educational outreach programme that will be of benefit to the local community.
Conclusion
6. This supplementary report has sought to clarify and address the issues and concerns which were raised by the Committee during the December meeting. The consultation process has been set out in detail. The County Council does not object to the scheme in its statutory roles in relation to waste sites and surface water flooding. The applicant has added further summarised justification and clarification pertinent to determination of this scheme.
7. The proposal is again recommended for approval with additional conditions suggested to ensure delivery of benefits to the local community and to impose a 25 year time limit to the proposed development.
RECOMMENDED that: subject to the application first being submitted to the Secretary of State as Green Belt development under the Town and Country Planning (Consultation) (England) Direction 2009, permission be granted subject to the conditions at the end of the appended report and conditions securing educational outreach and a 25 year time limit to the development.
A51
Appendix – Supplementary Information from Applicant
Broxbourne Borough Council Borough Offices Bishops’ College Churchgate Cheshunt Hertofordshire Graham Donnachie EN8 9XB Tel: 0131 440 6155 e-mail: [email protected] web: www.greencatrenewables.co.uk 07/01/2015
RE: 07/15/0866/F Broxbournebury Solar Field – Committee Briefing Note
Dear Mr Quaile,
As you will be aware, the application for a ground-mounted solar photovoltaic array on land at Cock Lane adjacent to the A10 near Hoddesdon, was discussed at the Planning and Regulatory Committee on the 15th of December 2015. Members of the Committee determined that the application be deferred to a future Committee meeting to gather additional information. It is understood that the request for additional information is in relation to the following areas:
a) The environmental impact of the development; b) Any added flood risk caused from the development; c) The effect of the development on water drainage at the site; d) The effect of the development in relation to the previous use of the site for landfill; e) The extent of any additional pollution to the area caused by the development; and f) The apparent lack of a wider community benefit arising from permitting this development in the green belt.
Whilst we understand that Hertfordshire County Council have been re-consulted to provide further clarification on a number of these points, it was considered a potentially useful exercise to provide additional comment, in relation to the points raised, ahead of the Committee meeting. Each of the issues highlighted as requiring additional information, as stated above, has been discussed overleaf.
We trust that the information provided is helpful and will be useful for the Committee Members in the determination of the application when next heard at Committee.
Kind Regards, Graham Donnachie
A52
a) The environmental impact of the development;
Although the development did not warrant an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), a full suite of Environmental Assessments were undertaken to support the application. These assessments covered all potential environmental effects associated with solar developments, including:
Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment; Ecological and Ornithological Assessment; Cultural Heritage and Archaeological Assessment; Flood Risk Assessment; Impact on Surface and Groundwater Hydrology; and An assessment against local and national policy.
These assessments have demonstrated that the proposed development will have a minimal impact on the key environmental issues. The minimal impact on environmental issues has been acknowledge by statutory consultees, who have expressed no objection to the proposal. The planning department have also confirmed the development as acceptable and in compliance with local and national policy.
As is discussed within the Planning Committee Report, the predominant point for debate is the potential impact on the Green Belt, within which the development is located. Whilst the Planning Committee Report acknowledged an impact on the Green Belt, it was assessed to be acceptable given the very special circumstances which support the development. This includes the minimal environmental impacts of the proposal and the encouragement through NPPF to improve derelict or damaged land within Green Belt areas.
The main points in relation to impact on the Green Belt have been summarised below:
NPPF Green Paragraph 79 of NPPF states that: “The fundamental aim of Green Belt policy is to Belt Policy prevent urban sprawl by keeping land permanently open; the essential characteristics of Green Belts are their openness and their permanence”. Paragraph 80 states that Green Belt serves five purposes: o To check the unrestricted sprawl of large built-up areas; o To prevent neighbouring towns merging into one another; o To assist in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment; o To preserve the setting and special character of historic towns; and o To assist in urban regeneration, by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land. Paragraph 87 states that: “… inappropriate development is, by definition, harmful to the Green Belt and should not be approved except in very special circumstances.‟ Paragraph 88 continues: “ ‘Very special circumstances’ will not exist unless the potential harm to the Green Belt by reason of inappropriateness, and any other harm, is clearly outweighed by other considerations”. Paragraph 91 notes that: “When located in the Green Belt, elements of many renewable energy projects will comprise inappropriate development. In such cases developers will need to demonstrate very special circumstances if projects are to proceed. Such very special circumstances may include the wider environmental benefits associated with increased production of energy from renewable sources”. Therefore as with any development, the acceptability of the solar development depends upon whether the benefits of the scheme outweigh the impacts it will have, which include impacts upon the Green Belt.
A53
Elements of The main purpose of the development is to generate clean energy from a renewable the scheme source, which in itself is considered a very special circumstance for development that within the Green Belt. contribute to The development has the potential to annually generate enough renewable ‘Very Special electricity for ~1,000 homes. Circumstances’ The development makes productive use of an area of derelict, unproductive land with an industrious history. NPPF supports the improvement of derelict land in Paragraph 81. The proposed development seeks to make long term biodiversity enhancements to have a positive and lasting impact on the site. The scheme will aid biodiversity by providing a sheltered habitat for plants and insect species. Impact on the The low-lying nature of the solar development is not expected to affect the Green Belt ’openness’ of the Green Belt, with the panels’ height not affecting either short or long distance views across the development site. The site is remarkably well screened from view outside of the site boundaries due to the significant screening provided by mature dense woodland on all aspects of the development. Paragraph 13 of NPPF sets out particular planning considerations that relate to solar development, which includes that planning authorities should be “encouraging the effective use of land by focusing large scale solar farms on previously developed and non-agricultural land”. Furthermore, as noted in NPPF, Minister for Energy and Climate Change at the time Greg Baker, during a speech in April 2013 stated that “for larger deployments, brownfield land should always be preferred”. In addition, the nature of the solar farm is not expected to conflict with any of the purposes of Green Belt land. The development will not encourage the merging of towns or urban sprawl, nor will it impact upon the setting and special character of any historic towns. The development is a temporary scheme with no residual construction impacts. Upon its removal there will be no remaining or long term impact upon the Green Belt.
Therefore, given that the development will not impact on the five primary purposes of the Green Belt, and that the development will generate electricity from a clean and renewable energy source, it is considered that the development is appropriate within the Green Belt. This is consistent with the Committee Report.
Furthermore, once the development is removed after its 25 year lifetime, there will be no visible remains of the development and therefore no long lasting impact on the greenbelt.
It is also true that the vast majority of the administrative boundary of Broxbourne Borough Council is designated as Green Belt, where it is not already occupied by residential areas, and therefore there are no suitable areas within the boundary of Broxbourne Borough Council for solar developments of this scale that are not designated by Green Belt.
b) Any added flood risk caused from the development;
A Flood Risk Assessment has been produced and was provided as part of the application submissions. This has been reviewed by Hertfordshire County Council who have acknowledged that the assessment has “sufficient detail to demonstrate that there is a feasible drainage scheme for the site, including attenuation volumes and exploring the most appropriate sustainable drainage method”.
The Flood Risk Assessment demonstrated that the site is not in proximity to any flood zones, surface water flooding or historic flood events and the development will not impact or interfere with these designated areas.
A54
c) The effect of the development on water drainage at the site;
Drainage on the site is anticipated to be largely unaffected, as there will not be an increase in runoff and the water will continue to drain out of the field as normal. This is often best demonstrated using the following image.
Where trenching is required, these will be of the infiltration type as this is the principal SuDS treatment method. This will be utilised on the access track to prevent any sedimentation.
The applicant is committed to following best practice construction guidelines and ensuring that any construction is sensitive to its previous industrious use.
d) The effect of the development in relation to the previous use of the site for landfill;
In a recent response to the application, Hertfordshire County Council clarified that the site was mixed waste landfill and, we are aware that this was closed in 1994. Over 20 years have passed since the closure of the landfill and it is anticipated that any significant settlement has long since occurred.
The former use of the site has been a major consideration for the design of the development. As confirmed by Hertfordshire County Council the landfill cap is located under over 1m of soil. It was a vital design criteria that the development did not interfere or breech the capping layer as this could have hazardous consequences. As such, the development design has sought to keep any excavations to a maximum depth of 0.2m, allowing for a significant buffer between construction work and the landfill cap.
Again, best practice and careful construction guidelines will be adhered to in order to ensure that the landfill cap is protected as a priority.
e) The extent of any additional pollution to the area caused by the development; and
It is not clear where the concern has originated from, but to our knowledge, there is no evidence to suggest that a solar development would cause any additional pollution.
In terms of decommissioning, the development will have a lifetime of 25 years, at which point the applicant will have to either apply for permission to allow the scheme to remain, or undertake the complete removal of the site. Solar panels have an expected lifetime of up to 40 years and will hold a value at the end of the development lifetime, and are therefore likely to be sold on the global market. Equally, all other materials will be removed from site and either reused or sold to other developments.
The decommissioning of the scheme will leave no visible trace of the development, and with the implementation of biodiversity enhancement works, the site should be left in an improved condition in comparison with its current condition.
f) The apparent lack of a wider community benefit arising from permitting this development in the green belt.
The applicant is aware that this development is one of, if not the first, solar development of this size and scale within the Broxbourne Borough Council boundaries. As such, it is recognised that this presents an opportunity to provide some educational and informative linkup with the local community. The applicant appreciated the potential value in
A55
providing educational opportunities, primarily to local schools, apprentice electricians or those with an interest in renewable energy.
Therefore, following the construction of the development, the applicant would be willing to hold open days or group site visits to allow the community to visit the site and learn more about the overwhelming benefits of renewable energy and some of the more technical details about the mechanics of a solar farm. The details about the most practical arrangements of these educational opportunities are yet to be finalised, and can be open for discussion with the local community, should the application gain planning consent.
Furthermore, should there be any further ideas or methods raised in which the development can benefit the community, the applicant would like to make clear that their door is open, and are willing to consider any options in order to ensure the development has a long lasting benefit to the site as well as the community.
A56
ORIGINAL REPORT
15 December 2015
PLANNING APPLICATIONS FOR DETERMINATION
Item 1: 07/15/0866/F
Location: Land at Cock Lane adjacent to the A10, Hoddesdon, Herts, EN11 8LS
Description: Erection of a ground-mounted solar photovoltaic array and associated infrastructure
Applicant: Mulbrick Clean Energy LLP
Agent: Green Cat Renewables
Date Received: 15.09.2015 Date of Committee: 15.12.2015
Officer Contact: Peter Quaile Expiry Date: 15.12.2015
Ward Councillors: Councillors Gordon, Hutchings and Rowland
RECOMMENDED that: subject to the application first being submitted to the Secretary of State as Green Belt development under the Town and Country Planning (Consultation) (England) Direction 2009, permission be granted subject to the conditions at the end of this report.
1. CONSULTATIONS
1.1 HCC Flood Risk Management – No objection subject to conditions
1.2 HCC Highways – No objection subject to conditions
1.3 HCC Archaeology – No objection subject to a condition requiring archaeological investigation prior to commencement of work
1.4 Environmental Health – No objection but advises that an Environmental Management Plan should be provided for the site.
1.5 Herts and Middx Wildlife Trust – Suggests a condition requiring an environmental design strategy to promote bio-diversity and on site ecological enhancement
1.6 Herts Police – Raise concerns over site security and CCTV coverage
A57
2. PUBLICITY
2.1 The application was advertised by means of site notices, newspaper advert and neighbour letters expired on 11th February 2015.
3. REPRESENTATIONS
3.1 No objections have been received to date.
4. RELEVANT LOCAL PLAN POLICIES
8.2 The following policies of the Borough of Broxbourne Local Plan Second Review 2001- 2011 (adopted December 2005) apply:
SUS2 Energy SUS18 Surface Water Drainage GBC2 Development in the Metropolitan Green Belt GBC6 Proposals for Non-Agricultural Uses of Green Belt Land GBC16 Landscape Character Areas and Enhancement HD1 Effects of Development on Nationally Important Sites and Monuments HD17 Retention/Enhancement of Landscape Features HD22 Community Safety IMP2 Community & Infrastructure needs linked to new development
8.3 The Borough Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG) (August 2004) is relevant in this case as it provides design guidance for all forms of development.
4.3 The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) 2012 also needs to be considered as it sets out the Government’s planning policies for England and how these are expected to be applied. In particular, paragraphs 79-92 deal with Green Belt locations and applications for renewable energy projects while paragraphs 97-98 guide planning authorities in setting a strategy for renewables and dealing with subsequent applications for such installations.
5. LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION OF SITE
5.1 This irregularly-shaped site adjoins the western side of the A10 immediately to the south of where Cock Lane road-bridge crosses the dual carriageway. The pedestrian bridge which accesses the eastern edge of the Broxbournebury Estate lies to the south of the site. The application site has an area of nearly 9.5 hectares while the array would occupy an area of just over 9 hectares.
A58
Application Site looking north along its eastern side
5.2 The site falls towards its southern boundary and as the A10 is in a cutting at this point, the site is set around 5 metres above the level of the carriageway at the boundary. The site itself has the profile of a an upturned dish with a raised central area. The site has been extracted for gravels, infilled then capped with gas vents dotted across the surface. The capping is covered with topsoil and some rough grassland of poor quality has established since the quarry was closed in the 1990s. There is dense woodland to the south side of the site, continuous tree/hedgerow along the A10 boundary and woodland along the majority of the northern boundary.
A59
To the west there is some tree cover but there are views from the open Green Belt into the application site. The site lies unused at present.
Western Boundary Eastern Boundary
5.3 Vehicle access is taken from Cock Lane on its southern side via an unmade track and field gate. The nearest dwelling is North Lodge to the west of the entrance along Cock Lane while Hoddesdonbury Farm which is a listed building is further along Cock Lane on the northern side of the road. There is a moated mediaeval site, which is an ancient monument, in the woods to the north-west of the site.
Vehicle Entrance from Cock Lane
6. PROPOSAL
6.1 This is a full application to install a solar photovoltaic (PV) array which would generate a maximum of five megawatts by means of approximately 17,840 solar panels facing directly south set at an angle of 25 degrees on metal frames secured by concrete bases. The maximum output equates to power for around 1000 houses. The rows of panels would be set around 5.4m apart at the northern end of the site but would be closer together at the southern end due to the slope of the land; the overall height of each of the generating structures would be 2.577m. The individual panels would be 99cm deep and 165cm wide. The generating panels would be served by five inverter stations (which are required to convert DC current to AC so that it can be transmitted into the national grid network) and a sub-station. A60
The maximum height of the inverter stations would be 2.92m and the sub-station would be 3.8m high. All these installations would be finished in dark green. There would be a mesh security fence and CCTV guarding the site.
6.2 The applicant has indicated that the connection to the National Grid will be below ground. Confirmation on this point is being sought from the applicant and an update will be provided to the Committee.
Proposed Site Layout
Proposed Solar PV Installation A61
6.3 The application is supported by a suite of documents as follows:
Design and Access Statement Landscape Design Report Flood Risk Assessment Ecology Assessment Environmental Appraisal Environmental Management Plan
6.4 The applicant sought a pre-application screening opinion in which the Council, as local planning authority, stated that a formal environmental assessment would not be required for the installation of a solar PV array on this site.
7. RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY
7.1 The relevant planning history relates to the mineral and waste operations.
7.2 Permission was granted 9th October 1979 under reference 7/588-1979 for “Use of existing vehicle access onto Cock Lane and new internal access road for extraction of sand and gravel.”
7.3 Permission was granted 11th November 1981 under reference 7/864/1981 for “Restoration of worked-out gravel pit by infilling with putrescible and non- putrescible waste.”
7.4 Permission was granted 23rd June 1998 under reference 7/226/1998 for “ Erection of skid-mounted, electronically operated pumping and flowing plant for the continuing safe dispersal of landfill gas.”
8. APPRAISAL
o The main issues for consideration in this case are as follows:
xii. Principle of installing the solar PV array on this Green Belt site. xiii. Design, layout, and appearance; xiv. Impact on amenity of neighbouring residential properties; xv. Highways; xvi. Ecology
Principles of development
o The relevant National policies in relation to the Metropolitan Green Belt are set out in paragraphs 79-92 of the NPPF. Paragraph 81 advises councils, amongst other objectives, to look “for opportunities to…..improve damaged and derelict land”
Paragraph 91 of the NPPF notes that “When located in the Green Belt, elements of many renewable energy projects will comprise inappropriate development.”
With regard to climate change and flooding, Paragraph 97 of the NPPF states that local planning authorities should “have a positive strategy to promote energy from renewable and low carbon sources.” A62
In relation to determining planning applications for renewable energy development, Paragraph 98 of the NPPF states that local planning authorities should “approve the application if its impacts are (or can be made) acceptable.” The footnote to this guidance notes “unless material considerations indicate otherwise.”
With regard to Local Plan Policies, SUS2 Energy states the Council will support energy conservation and reductions in energy demands by (d) “Encouraging, wherever appropriate, the development of renewable energy sources, subject to other environmental policies of this Plan”. Policy GBC2 sets out the uses and operational development appropriate in the Green Belt but to an extent is superseded by the guidance set out in the NPPF. Policy GBC6 sets out criteria against which non-agricultural uses of Green Belt land will be assessed.
8.3 The erection of structures in the form of the PV panels and supporting structures, along with the inverter stations and sub-station is considered to be inappropriate development in the Green Belt as they are not a category of operational development explicitly set out as appropriate in national or local policy. In such circumstances, it is necessary to demonstrate very special circumstances in order for a development to proceed. In the case of the application site, it has been used for landfill purposes, including putrescible waste, then restored with a series of gas vents. It currently has no beneficial land use and is clearly damaged land of poor quality. Paragraph 81 of the NPPF notes that one of the primary objectives for planning in the Green Belt is to “improve damaged and derelict land”. It is considered that the application site falls squarely within the category of damaged land as set out in the NPPF and that this a very special circumstance in favour of its development. Allied to this, the installation of a PV array would be accompanied by landscape and ecological enhancements which, over the period of the working life of the facility which is initially set at 25 years, would help to return the site to a usable condition even if only as pasture/grazing land. This scheme, albeit inappropriate development, is in accordance with a fundamental objective of the Green Belt as set out in the NPPF. The proposal is lent additional weight by the NPPF policies set out in Paragraphs 97-98 which offer strategic policy support for renewable sources of power generation and a development management presumption in favour of their approval “if its impacts are (or can be made) acceptable”. In the context of the current nature of the land and the strong local and national policy support for schemes of renewable energy it is considred that there are very special circumstances which support the principle of this development in the Green Belt. The detailed assessment revolves around the material impact which would result from the use and operational development proposed on this site and any other material considerations.
8.4 The Council has a positive planning stance promoting renewable energy sources in the form of saved Policy SUS2. The rider on that policy is that approval of applications is subject to other environmental policies in the plan which reflects the approach of Paragraph 98 of the NPPF set out above. Paragraphs 8.7 onwards assess the design and appearance of the proposal and this helps to inform the decision to be reached in the context of a general policy presumption, both locally and nationally, in favour of schemes for renewable energy generation.
A63
8.5 In terms of the criteria set out in saved Policy GBC6, there is no loss of good quality farm land in this application as all the land, apart from the areas for vehicle access at the edges of the site, has been mined and backfilled. There would be landscape enhancement in the shorter and longer terms. The highway impacts are considered in paragraph 8.10 below. The environmental impacts are examined in paragraph 8.7.
8.6 Subject to the detailed considerations relating to environmental, highway and any other impacts the principle of installing a renewable energy facility in this Green Belt location is considered to be acceptable.
Design, layout and appearance
8.7 The design of the PV array is to a large extent dictated by the technical requirements of optimising the output from the given site area. The angle of attack to the sun at 25 degrees is set, the orientation facing south is ideal and the size/appearance of the individual panels is also standardised across the industry. The distance of the installed panels from the application site boundaries would be a minimum of 8m and would more generally range between 10m and 20m. The layout of the scheme would not crowd the boundaries. The height of the overall structures retaining the panels would be modest at less than 2.6m and the 0.8m clearance above ground would allow for maintenance and for wild flower planting around and between the supporting framework. The necessary, ancillary inverter stations (four in number) would be typical utility buildings finished in dark green and at less than 3m in height would not be visually intrusive. The sub-station making the link to the National Grid would be sheltered from public view by woodland near to the site entrance off Cock Lane so would not be visually intrusive.
8.8 With regard to the wider impact on the Green Belt and its openness, the first point to note is that, given the nature of the proposed development, it is almost inevitable that the land available of the necessary site dimensions will be set within the Green Belt. In this context it is considered preferable to use a site which is damaged and which has a good degree of existing visual protection from its topography and planting. The overall height of the array is less than 2.6m and the tallest ancillary structure (sub-station) would be 3.8m high. Although these heights are not tall in the context of buildings and structures, the sheer scale of the work proposed over a site of over 9 hectares means that there will be a significant impact on the openness of the Green Belt. However, this impact needs to be considered in the context of the nature of the site and the policy support for renewable energy generation in the NPPF. On balance it is considered that the harm to the Geen Belt is acceptable when weighted against the beneficial proposed use.
8.9 In terms of the particular site characteristics, it is set well above the eye line of drivers on the A10 and there is a strong planting belt along this eastern boundary which would also help to minimise the visual impact when travelling west along Cock Lane over the dual carriageway. There is dense woodland to the southern and northern boundaries which will allow for minimal views of the installation from outside the site. To the west the boundary is characterised by a more open vista but the applicant is amenable to the vegetation being strengthened along this flank of the site and a condition is proposed to secure this site improvement. To the
A64
south there is a pedestrian bridge which travels across the A10 from the end of Norris Grove into a path through the woodland into the Broxbournebury Estate.
View of site (arrowed) from the A10 road bridge
8.10 While the PV array will be clearly visible when crossing this bridge it is considered that this one main view of the site would not be sufficient reason to warrant a recommendation for refusal. Members will be aware that the fact that a development is largely protected from public view does not mean that it cannot have a materially adverse impact on the Green Belt and the reasons for a site’s inclusion within it. In this case, there will only be limited public views of the facility and this is again set against the backdrop of local and national policy militating in favour of development of renewable energy sources. The projected lifespan of the generating project is 25 years which in effect means that its impact on the Green Belt is likely to be removed in the longer term. Overall the design, layout, appearance and impact on the wider Green Belt in this locality are considered to be acceptable in compliance with saved Policy SUS2 and the objectives set out in the NPPF.
Impact on amenity of neighbouring properties
8.11 There are two residential properties in the vicinity of the site, North Lodge and Hoddesdonbury Farm, both of which are located on Cock Lane. North Lodge was originally built as a lodge serving the Broxbournebury Estate, the remains of which form Hertfordshire Golf and Country club course and grounds to the west of the application site. The lodge is set between elements of woodland which run along the northern borders of the application site. The garden of this house is set to the south and as a result there would be views of the PV array from the house through the gap in the trees. The distance from the rear of the nearest array of PV panels to the end of the rear garden of North Lodge would be c.27m; with a height of less than 2.6m for the structures it is not considered that the appearance would be materially intrusive to the occupiers of the nearest house. The fact that the panels would necessarily face away from the house, orientated south, means that there would be no potential dazzle reflecting from the installation. A65
Rear of North Lodge viewed from the application site
8.12 Hoddesdonbury Farm is set across Cock Lane and the listed farmhouse is set well into the site with a large barn being the main frontage building. Although the farmhouse would face towards the application site, it is around 100m from the application site’s northern boundary and there is dense woodland intervening. The proposed panels would again be orientated away from the house preventing potential dazzle so it is not considered that there would be a material impact on the amenity of this house.
8.13 Overall it is considered that the proposal complies with Policy SUS2 as it would not materially affect amenity for the neighbouring residential properties.
Highways
8.14 It is proposed to retain the existing access from Cock Lane which has previously been used by considerable numbers of large commercial vehicles in the form of dumper trucks associated with gravel extraction, then for infilling, capping and restoration. In its proposed use as a renewable energy centre there would be negligible traffic, confined to infrequent maintenance visits from service engineers and landscape contractors. There would be a period of significant commercial vehicle access during the construction phase but the County Council as local highway authority does not raise objection to the use of this access subject to agreement of sight lines from the access point and a construction traffic management plan. In terms of highway safety, as the array would be set well above eye line and is designed to absorb as opposed to reflecting light, it is considered unlikely that there would be a significant risk of drivers being dazzled in conditions of bright sunlight. Installations of a similar nature have been approved in similar proximity to main traffic routes elsewhere in the south of England. Conditions to deal with sight lines and construction traffic management are proposed as part of the recommendation and overall the effect on the highway is considered to be acceptable in accordance with saved Policy T3 of the Local Plan.
A66
Ecology
8.15 The application includes detailed assessments of the natural features, flora and fauna on the site. The ecological survey has not found any evidence of protected species and the majority of the site is of low ecological value. The main areas where there is wildlife are the tree/shrub belts around the perimeter and in the adjoining woodland which is outside the application site. There is a good cross- section of bird life in the tree belts. The intention is to retain all the mature planting along the boundaries and to strengthen it by infill planting along the western boundary which currently has significant gaps in its bordering vegetation. The applicant has proposed planting wildflowers across the site to enhance bio-diversity as an element of long-terms reclamation of the land. Herts and Middx Wildlife Trust has suggested that a better approach, as part of an ecological design strategy, would be to plant wildflower seeds across the site and a condition is proposed to ensure that the correct approach is taken over the life of the development and beyond to maximise the ecological potential of this Green Belt site.
Surface Water Flooding
8.16 The site lies within Flood Zone 1 with no watercourses in close proximity and no known history of flooding from surface water. As the site exceeds one hectare in extent the surface water flood risk falls to be assessed by the County Council as Lead Local Flood Authority. The applicant has submitted the necessary flood risk assessment (FRA) to accompany the proposal but the County Council has evaluated the document and found it to be inadequate in terms of the Government’s technical guidance. The applicant has amended it and the County Council no longer raises objection. A draft condition is proposed to deal with the matter of surface water flooding.
Other matters
8.17 As a result of the historic landfill use of the site it is contaminated by reason of mixed household waste being tipped for many years. The site is currently capped and ventilated to allow methane and other gases to escape. The works to install generating infrastructure is intended to be minimally intrusive to the landfill with a maximum depth of 20cm for cable channels and wherever possible, connections to run on the surface. The Council’s Environmental Health section has recommended that further details be submitted in relation to how the trenching will be undertaken. In addition, that section has suggested that an Environmental Management Plan should be submitted to cover both the construction stage and the ongoing maintenance of the facility. Although a document has been submitted with the application which covers some of the above points, a much more detailed Plan is required to ensure that all relevant issues set out above are managed and monitored and is required by condition.
8.18 Herts Policy Design Advisor has noted that a mesh fence is proposed and is concerned that adequate levels of security are provided as part of the proposal. The applicant is aware of this concern and is amenable to a condition which requires further consideration of security measures, including passive security lighting, designed to ensure that valuable on-site resources are adequately protected. The design of the fence will need to be carefully considered in
A67
discharging the condition so that it does not have a visually jarring effect on this semi-rural part of the Green Belt.
8.19 Hoddesdonbury Farm which is to the north of the site across Cock Lane is Grade 2 listed and the remains of a motte castle which is a scheduled ancient monument, lies in the woodland to the south of Cock Lane. Neither historic asset would be physically affected by the proposal. Due to its distance from the site, the setting of the listed building is not considered to be materially affected. The motte site is located in dense woodland well beyond the boundary of the site and its setting would not be materially affected by the proposed installation of PV panels.
8.20 An archaeological investigation is not considered to be necessary for a landfill site.
Planning Obligation
8.21 The application has been assessed having regard to the objectives of saved Local Plan Policy IMP2, the NPPF and CIL Regulations. It is considered that in the context of local and national planning policy the proposed development does not meet the policy criteria to seek a planning obligation to mitigate perceived impacts and would not meet the three statutory tests set out in the CIL Regulations.
9. CONCLUSION
9.1 This application proposes the first large-scale renewable solar energy scheme for the Borough. It is proposed on a landfill site in the Green Belt to the west of the A10. The scheme constitutes inappropriate development in the Green Belt but the report concludes that there are very special circumstances apparent in this case. The principle of the scheme has been found to be acceptable in terms of the NPPF and in general terms it should be noted that national and local planning policies contain a presumption in favour of developments providing renewable energy, subject to other material considerations. Although the scheme will have a significant impact on the openness of the Green Belt, the report concludes that, on balance, this impact is acceptable on this particular site.
9.2 The impact on the two neighbouring residential properties has been assessed and found to be acceptable as is the wider impact on the Green Belt. The County Council has not raised objection in terms of highway safety or surface water flood risk. It is considered that there would neither be a material impact on the setting of the ancient monument which is located in the woodland to the north-west of the site nor on the setting of the Grade 2 listed Hoddesdonbury Farm across Cock Lane to the north of the site. Subject to condition the improvements to the quality and diversity of flora and fauna on the site are considered to be acceptable. Fencing, passive security lighting and CCTV would be installed to ensure an adequate level of protection against intruders.
9.3 Under the terms of The Town and Country Planning (Consultation) (England) Direction 2009, the Council is required to notify the Secretary of State in relation to certain categories of development in the Green Belt. Where a proposal comprises “any other development which, by reason of its scale, nature or location would have a significant impact on the openness of the Green Belt”, the application should be referred to central Government. In this instance the report concludes that there would be a significant impact on openness and it is considered necessary to submit
A68
the proposal to the Secretary of State before finally determining the proposal. Members are recommended to approve the application.
10. RECOMMENDED that: subject to the application first being submitted to the Secretary of State as Green Belt development under the Town and Country Planning (Consultation) (England) Direction 2009, planning permission be granted subject to the conditions set out below.
1) GEN01A Standard Time Limit – 3 years 2) GEN07 Development in Accordance With Numbered Plans 3) GEN15 Fencing (Notwithstanding submitted plans) 4) LS01 Landscaping Scheme Required 5) LS02 Landscaping Details including new tree/hedgerow planting 6) LS03 Replacement Planting 7) Ecological Design Strategy 8) VEH01 Visibility Splays 9) Full details of the design, implementation, maintenance and management of an appropriate surface water drainage scheme 10) Wheel washing for construction vehicles 11) Construction vehicle management plan, including parking for contractors’ vehicles to be submitted and approved prior to commencement of works 12) Hours of construction work (8-6) Mon-Fri, 8-1 Sat and no Sundays or Bank Holidays 13) Environmental Management Plan 14) Submission of details of all external lighting and CCTC installation 15) Full details of site reinstatement when the facility falls redundant, to be completed within one calendar year of closure.
A69
Ref No Description & Location Reason for Expiry date Delay/Comments LARGESCALE MAJOR TOTAL MAJOR THIS MONTH: 0 TOTAL MAJOR LAST MONTH: 0 SMALLSCALE MAJOR 07/14/0569/O Outline application for Awaiting s.106 26.09.2014 residential development of 13 obligation. dwellings, access, car parking, public open space and other related development - Former Wormley Primary School St Laurence Drive Wormley 07/14/1133/O Outline application for the Awaiting s.106 19.03.2015 erection of 14 dwellings with obligation. associated access and landscaping - Land adjacent to 54, 56 & 58 Kennedy Avenue, Hoddesdon 07/15/0126/F Variation to conditions 6 and 16 Awaiting Deed of 15.05.2015 of planning permission Variation from 07/11/0403/F - Formerly Applicant. Delamare House Delamare Road Cheshunt 07/15/0423/F The demolition of the existing Awaiting 11.08.2015 building on site, and the withdrawal erection of a new part two, part following appeal three and part four storey mixed decision to use building with a single approve 45 flats. commercial unit on the ground floor (use class A1-A4) and 36 new residential units (C3), car parking, landscaping and ancillary features (Re- submission 07/14/0904/F) - New River Arms High Road Turnford 07/15/0715/F Residential development of 14 Report to March 27.10.2015 dwellings - Cheshunt Park Farm P&R Park Lane Paradise Cheshunt 07/15/1110/LDP Certificate of lawfulness for the To be 11.01.2016 proposed change of use of determined by 15 dwelling house (C3) to small Jan scale house in multiple occupation (C4) - 109 Blindmans Lane Cheshunt TOTAL SMALLSCALE MAJOR THIS MONTH: 6 TOTAL SMALLSCALE MAJOR LAST MONTH: 6
A70
MINOR 17.03.2011 07/11/0043/F Change of use of the existing first Awaiting floor of the property from B1 office withdrawal. and premises to C3 residential dwelling, subdivision of first floor to create 4 no. self-contained residential flats - 89-93 Turners Hill Cheshunt 10.11.2011 07/11/0730/O Outline application for new Awaiting s.106 footbridge over railway line at obligation. Park Lane, including bridleway route via level crossing to be discontinued with new alternative pedestrian footpath, cycle/bridleway route (Refer 07/11/0731/F) - Land opposite 116 Park Lane Waltham Cross 13.03.2013 07/12/0703/O Outline application for first floor Awaiting s.106 rear and side extensions, addition obligation and of a second floor and conversion additional to provide seven residential information re apartments (Re-submission parking 07/12/0064/O) - 75-81 High Street Waltham Cross 10.09.2013 07/13/0608/F Construction of 3 no. additional Awaiting two bed flats at third floor level - clarification on Former Hoddesdon Snooker Club S106 from site Conduit Lane Hoddesdon applicant. 17.01.2014 07/13/0980/F Erection of 2 no. two storey blocks Planning obligation to provide 32 rooms with received, awaiting communal facilities and parking issue. for occupation in association with The Vicarage (Re-submission 07/13/0071/F) - 11 Amwell Street 27.08.2014 07/14/0566/F Re-alignment and introduction of Under traffic lights at the junction of consideration Brookfield Lane West and Flamstead End Road - Road Junction Brookfield Lane West and Flamstead End Road, Cheshunt 09.09.2014 07/14/0634/F Demolition of existing place of Awaiting s.106 worship and replacement with obligation. new Kingdom Hall and new minister's accommodation and new pedestrian access gate - Kingdom Hall Charlton Close Hoddesdon
A71
21.11.2014 07/14/0867/F Continued use of vacant industrial Awaiting flood risk site as open storage, parking and assessment. container storage (Refer 07/13/0868/F) - Plots F and L RD Park Essex Road Hoddesdon 12/01/2015 07/14/1041/F Retention of rear wall mounted air Seeking further conditioning unit - 247A Turners advice from Hill Cheshunt Environmental Health 03.03.2015 07/15/0009/F Retention of storage container Under (Refer 07/13/0947/F) - Calves consideration Croft Farm Darnicle Hill Cheshunt
21.04.2015 07/15/0155/F Demolition of existing (56-58 Awaiting further Turners Hill) and erection of a new information. three storey block of two retail units and seven residential units - 56-58 Turners Hill Cheshunt 22.05.2015 07/15/0267/F Change of opening hours from To be amended by 7am to 11pm Monday to Sundays applicant. and Bank or Statutory Holidays to 7am to 11pm Sunday to Thursday and Bank or Statutory Holidays and 7am to 2am Friday and Saturday - 74 High Street Waltham Cross 22.05.2015 07/15/0281/F Change of use from B2 (general FRA to be industrial) to B8 (storage) of up to submitted. 35 self storage units (shipping containers) - Industrial Yard Essex Road Hoddesdon 02.06.2015 07/15/0284/F Erection of a four bed detached Amended house (Re-submission drawings received 07/14/0333) - Lullingfield which are under Yewlands Hoddesdon consideration 17.06.2015 07/15/0345/F Demolition of existing stables and Awaiting further erection of replacement stable information. building - Feel Free Farm Cock Lane Hoddesdon 23.06.2015 07/15/0377/F Erection of 2 no. two bed semi- Awaiting s.106 detached dwellings - 118 Great obligation. Cambridge Road, Cheshunt 10.08.2015 07/15/0540/F First floor rear extension with new Awaiting amended external staircase - 45 Turners Hill plans and Cheshunt additional information. 14.08.2015 07/15/0564/F Erection of steel feature entrance Amended gates to both site entrances and drawings received the erection of a single storey which are under substation to the south east consideration entrance - Land off Halstead Hill A72
and Barrow Lane Goffs Oak
14.08.2015 07/15/0573/F Demolition of existing car garage Under buildings and redevelopment of 1 consideration no. three storey block of retail/office on ground floor and offices on first and second floors and 1 no. three storey block of 2 no. one bed and 4 no. two bed residential units - 110 Turners Hill Cheshunt 18.08.2015 07/15/0583/F Erection of a detached two bed Awaiting s.106 bungalow - 39 Dudley Avenue obligation. Waltham Cross 21.09.2015 07/15/0706/F Stable block with feed and Insufficient bedding barn - Land opposite information Beaumont Manor Farm and provided adjacent to The White House Beaumont Road 18.09.2015 07/15/0716/F Erection of a sustainable, Awaiting environment friendly 4 bed amendments dwelling, including temporary before submission underground training and to P&R education center,using renewable energies - Land North of Pylon Farm St James Road Goffs Oak 02.10.2015 07/15/0746/F Temporary construction access Awaiting further from Dark Lane for the details in relation redevelopment of the former St to highway Mary's School (planning comments permission ref: 07/14/0076/F) - Former St Marys High School Site Churchgate Cheshunt 11.11.2015 07/15/0878/F Single/first floor rear extension Awaiting further and conversion into two self consultation. contained houses - 1 Turnford Cottages High Road Turnford 13.11.2015 07/15/0888/F Internal alterations, insertion of Awaiting listed two new external doors, building report replacement of modern window, insertion of conservation rooflight (Refer listed building consent 07/15/0889/LB) - 102 and 104 High Street Hoddesdon 24.11.2015 07/15/0915/F Demolition of existing bungalow Awaiting S106. and erection of 2 no four bed detached dwellings (Re- submission 07/15/0729/F) - 199 Cuffley Hill Goffs Oak
A73
25.11.2015 07/15/0921/F Retention of farm access track Awaiting further and improvements to access onto information Park Lane Paradise - Cheshunt relating to Park Farm Park Lane Paradise materials used to Cheshunt create track 25.11.2015 07/15/0923/F Addition of one floor comprising of Awaiting revisions 5 no. 2 bed flats (Re-submission 07/15/0551/F) - Eleanor House 33-35 Eleanor Cross Road Waltham Cross 27.11.2015 07/15/0933/F 45 Church Lane Cheshunt - Awaiting revisions Demolition of outbuildings, provision of five new car parking spaces, internal and external alterations including re-roof the main building and reconfigure the landscaping (Refer listed building application 07/15/0934/LB) 09.12.2015 07/15/0949/F Retention of front porch and rear Under raised platform to existing storage consideration barn and workshop - Broxbournebury Vineyard Cock Lane Hoddesdon 09.12.2015 07/15/0974/F Variation to condition 2 of Under planning permission consideration 07/11/0766/FP to provide temporary living accommodation for grape pickers and winemakers in the first floor of the existing storage barn/workshop for 3 months of each calendar year only - Broxbournebury Vineyard Cock Lane Hoddesdon 11.12.2015 07/15/0988/F Erection of a detached two storey Awaiting two bed dwelling house completed S106 incorporating a new crossover and agreement parking to the existing dwelling (Re-submission 07/15/0246/F) - 20 Central Avenue Waltham Cross 15.12.2015 07/15/1001/F Erection of a detached two bed Awaiting house - 1 Hargreaves Avenue completed S106 Cheshunt agreement 22.12.2015 07/15/1022/F Extension to ground floor flat and Awaiting S106 erection of a two bed flat with 4 no. garages under - 47 St Michaels Road Broxbourne 22.12.2015 07/15/1025/F Single storey side extension and Linked to conversion of existing house to 07/16/0004/HF create 2 no. one bedroom under dwellings (Re-submission consideration. 07/15/0196/F) - 13 The Chase A74
28.12.2015 07/15/1048/F Conversion of agricultural building Under into two dwellings with associated consideration curtilage (Re-submission 07/15/0332/F) - Spring Farm Old Park Ride Waltham Cross 06.01.2016 07/15/1068/F Demolition of side extension and Under erection of 2 no. two bedroom consideration houses - 3 Central Avenue Waltham Cross 07.01.2016 07/15/1076/F Variation to condition 2 of Revised (now planning permission 07/13/0846/F accurate) that the single storey light drawings received industrial unit for MOT Service and under Station is completed in consideration. accordance with the proposals contained in drawings TMA/112/04B - Phoenix Garage Essex Road Hoddesdon TOTAL MINOR THIS MONTH: 38 TOTAL MINOR LAST MONTH: 30
OTHER 02.06.2008 7/0287/08/F/WOL Change of use of ground and first Awaiting floor to (B1) offices (Re-submission withdrawal. 7/1207/07/F/WOL) - 206 Turners Hill Cheshunt 03.09.2014 07/12/0110/F Change of use of ground floor shop Awaiting s.106 to 2 bedroom self contained flat - 23 obligation. Whitley Road Hoddesdon 23.05.2012 07/12/0253/LDC Certificate of lawfulness for an Under existing use of part garden for the consideration. storage of building materials part open and part enclosed - 2 Longfield Lane Cheshunt 24.06.2013 07/13/0139/F Continued use of The Vicarage as a Awaiting s.106 17 bed hostel - 11 Amwell Street obligation. Hoddesdon
31.07.2014 07/14/0280/F Small animal sanctuary with visitor Under facilities including ancillary consideration. outbuildings and various non- illuminated signage (Re-submission 07/13/0491/F) - Lucky Horse Shoes
Sanctuary, Cock Lane, Hoddesdon
19.09.2014 07/14/0393/F Change of use of ground floor from Awaiting s.106 retail to self contained two bed obligation. residence with single storey rear extension - 39 King Edward Road< Waltham Cross
A75
31.07.2014 07/14/0483/F Change of use of first floor to self- Awaiting s.106 contained flat and loft conversion obligation. with rear dormer - 2 Clarendon Parade Turners Hill 02.12.2014 07/14/0896/F Brook Farm Cuffley Hill Cuffley - Under Retrospective change of use of consideration. agricultural buildings (Units A, B, H and I) to Class B8 (storage) use 15.12.2014 07/14/0940/F Variation to conditions 1 and 2 of Under planning permission 07/11/0037/F to consideration. permit further occupation of the plot - 19 Leeside Wharf Road Wormley 27.11.2015 07/15/0934/LB 45 Church Lane Cheshunt - Listed Awaiting building consent for demolition of revisions outbuildings, provision of five new car parking spaces, internal and external alterations including re-roof the main building and reconfigure the landscaping (Refer 07/15/0933/F) 15.12.2014 07/14/0941/F Variation to conditions 1 and 2 of Under granted permission consideration. APP/W1905/C/11/2151926 to permit further occupation of the plot - 23 Leeside Wharf Road Wormley 06.01.2015 07/14/0946/LB Listed building consent to re-roof The Requires Beaufort Suite Hall - Beaufort Suite Secretary of Bishops College Churchgate State decision.
06.02.2015 07/14/1115/F Removal of condition 16 of planning Under permission 7/0078/05/F/WX - consideration. Newsprinters( Broxbourne) Ltd Great Eastern Road Waltham Cross 11.03.2015 07/15/0036/F Variation to condition 3 of planning Under permission 07/13/0583/F that the consideration workshop is completed in accordance with the proposals contained in drawing SG-019 A - Feel Free Farm Cock Lane Hoddesdon 30.07.2015 07/15/0499/LDC Certificate of lawfulness for the Awaiting more existing use of the pool house as a information beauticians - Brackendale St James Road Goffs Oak 30.07.2015 07/15/0500/LDC Certificate of lawfulness for the Awaiting more existing use of the outbuilding as a information graphics design and sign making business - Brackendale St James Road Goffs Oak 30.07.2015 07/15/0501/LDC Certificate of lawfulness for the Awaiting more existing use of the garage as a information residential dwelling - Brackendale St James Road Goffs Oak A76
26.08.2015 07/15/0611/HF Replacement single storey garden Under studio/garage - 36 New Road consideration Broxbourne 03.09.2015 07/15/0638/HF Retention of new garden fence - 33 Under Chadwell Avenue Cheshunt consideration 28.09.2015 07/15/0725/LDP Certificate of lawfulness for a Insufficient proposed single storey side and rear information extension, front porch and loft conversion with rear dormer - 35 Bell Lane Broxbourne 08.10.2015 07/15/0765/F Change of use from single family Awaiting dwelling to HMO - 3 Stoneleigh amendments Close Waltham Cross 30.10.2015 07/15/0870/LDP Certificate of lawfulness for a Under proposed 1m high fence around land consideration to the side - 48 Columbia Road, Turnford 13.11.2015 07/15/0889/LB Listed building consent for internal Awaiting listed alterations, insertion of two new building report external doors, replacement of modern window, insertion of conservation rooflight (Refer 07/15/0888/F) - 102 and 104 High Street Hoddesdon 17.11.2015 07/15/0893/LDP Certificate of lawfulness for proposed Awaiting loft conversion with rear dormer and amendments change in roof shape from hipped to gable - 99 Stortford Road Hoddesdon 19.11.2015 07/15/0897/LDC Certificate of lawfulness for the Awaiting existing use of garage as a withdrawal residential habitable room - 2 Ellis Close Hoddesdon 27.11.2015 07/15/0934/LB Listed building consent for demolition Awaiting of outbuildings, provision of five new revisions car parking spaces, internal and external alterations including re-roof the main building and reconfigure the landscaping (Refer 07/15/0933/F) - 45 Church Lane Cheshunt 08.12.2015 07/15/0998/F Removal of conditions 8, 11 and 12 Under and variation to conditions 4 and 7 of consideration planning permission 07/15/0181/F - 55 High Road Broxbourne
07/15/0990/LDC Certificate of lawfulness for the Awaiting legal existing 2 metre perimeter fence - 49 advice Cassandra Gate Cheshunt 15.12.2015 07/15/1000/LDP Certificate of lawfulness for a Under proposed detached garage - Apple consideration Tree Cottage 54B Whitley Road Hoddesdon
A77
16.12.2015 07/15/1035/HF 1.5 storey side and front extension Under (refer 07/15/0045/HF) - Tudor Farm consideration Church Lane Wormley 17.12.2015 07/15/1006/HF Retention of existing vehicle cross Under over, earthworks involving raised consideration. ground levels within existing garden, raised timber deck area and new boundary fences - 9 Bassingbourne Close Broxbourne 24.12.2015 07/15/1031/HF Hardstanding and vehicle crossover - Under 24 Eleanor Cross Road Waltham consideration Cross 28.12.2015 07/15/1034/AC 3 no low level and one 3.15m high Awaiting hoarding signs externally illuminated meeting - Tina Nursery Goffs Lane Goffs Oak 30.12.2015 07/15/1052/HF Single storey rear extension and Under front canopy with porch - 6 Andrews consideration Lane Cheshunt 04.01.2016 07/15/1063/HF Loft conversion with two rear Under dormers to include a change from hip consideration to gable and raising the ridge height by 40cm - 3 Brinley Close Cheshunt 05.01.2016 07/15/1064/LDP Certificate of lawfulness for proposed Under loft conversion with rear dormer - consideration 119 Trinity Lane Waltham Cross 12.01.2016 07/15/1109/HF Remove existing roof and construct Under additional floor with front and rear consideration dormers (Re-submission 07/15/0898/HF) - 78 High Road Wormley 13.01.2016 07/15/1094/F Roof Terrace - 6 The Coach House Under Hogges Close consideration 13.01.2016 07/15/1143/F Variation to condition 8 of planning Under permission 07/14/0102/F to relocate consideration two parking spaces - Post Office 38 Stanstead Road Hoddesdon TOTAL OTHERS THIS MONTH: 39 TOTAL OTHERS LAST MONTH: 31 GRAND TOTAL THIS MONTH: 83 GRAND TOTAL LAST MONTH: 67
A78