LAND AT POTTERELLS FARM EXAMINATION OF THE LOCAL PLAN 2013-32

STATEMENT TO STAGE 8 REGULATION 19 (SUBMITTED) SITES IN OR ADJACENT TO VILLAGES – SOUTHERN SETTLEMENTS

ON BEHALF OF THE POTTERELLS FARM PARTNERSHIP (ID: 1047643) APRIL 2020

1 Introduction

1.1 This statement has been prepared on behalf of the Potterells Farm Partnership and their interest in land at Potterells Farm (WeG15), Welham Green. The site has been assessed as being suitable, available and achievable for residential development in Welwyn and Hatfield Borough Council’s (WHBC) Housing and Employment Land Availability Assessment (HELAA) in 2016 (see Appendix A) and more recently in 2019 (see Appendix B).

1.2 This statement responds to the ‘Questions and Matters’ issued by the Inspector in respect of the Southern Settlements at Stage 8 of the examination and is supported by the following Appendixes:

• Appendix A – WHBC HELAA 2016 - WeG15 extract • Appendix B – WHBC HELAA 2019 - WeG15 extract • Appendix C – WHBC Housing Site Selection Paper 2016 – extract inc. Paras 16.7, 16.13 and 16.17 • Appendix D – Report to the Cabinet Housing and Planning Panel Meeting on 16 March 2017 - extract inc. Para 4.20 • Appendix E – Statement of HCC Property Development Services to Hearing Session 12 Policy SP 14 New Schools – extract inc. Para 2.13 • Appendix F - Statement of Common Ground between HCC and WHBC relating to Policy SP14 (EX57) - extract inc. Paras 5.2 and 5.3 • Appendix G – WHBC HELAA 2019 - WeG17 extract

2. Welham Green Background

2.1 Despite determining the suitability, availability and achievability of this site in the HELAA and others at Welham Green (WeG1, WeG3, WeG6, WeG10 and WeG12) the Council has only proposed limited growth at Welham Green during the plan period restricting it to 92 homes, including 80 dwellings at Marshmoor (WeG4b) and 12 gypsy and travellers pitches at Foxes Lane (GTLAA01). The Council resisted further allocations at Welham Green on the grounds of insufficient primary (see Appendix C) and secondary education capacity (see Appendix D). This has resulted in a reduction in the proposed housing provision at Welham Green on the basis of an artificial education restriction, which is an unjustified approach and one that is not supported in evidence.

2.2 Submissions made on behalf of ‘the Promoters at Welham Green’ individually to the Regulation 19 consultation and collectively to Stages 2 and 3 of the examination have demonstrated that deliverable education solutions exist in Welham Green, including making land available for a new 1fe/2fe primary school at Land south of Dixons Hill

Road (WeG17), which is also within the control of the Potterells Farm Partnership. This was supported by the following material:

• Education Position Statement (EPS) prepared by EFM Consultants • School Delivery Plan (SDP) prepared by EPDS Consultants • A Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) prepared by the Promotion Group • Green Belt Review prepared by Terence O’Rourke • Transport Statement prepared by Vectos

2.3 County Council (HCC) has since confirmed that education capacity need not be a constraint to development at Welham Green; the New Barnfield site can be made available for a secondary school* (see Appendix E) and further modifications can be made to draft Policy SP 14 New Schools to provide additional primary education** (see Appendix F).

Policy SADM 26, Site HS11 (Hat11), Land at South Way

Matter 1 – Sustainability

14) Is there sufficient capacity within the local schools to provide places for the children likely to be generated by the development?

AND

15) If not, what extra capacity is required and where would it be located?

3.1 The Statement of Common Ground (SoCG) between HCC, WHBC, Ptarmigan Land and Mrs C Horton Settlement (EX55) (the HS11 SoCG) introduces a proposed change to the submission plan through the introduction of a new primary school at Site HS11 (Hat11), specifically through adding an additional bullet point in the site-specific considerations at Table 10: • Provision of land for a new 2FE Primary School site and playfield. Access to be provided through the housing allocation from South Way.

3.2 The SoCG between HCC and WHBC relating to Policy SP14 (EX57) reveals that this proposed change is also to be reflected in a proposed update to Policy SP14 New Schools through a modification to sub-paragraph II, “A new primary school site is also identified within housing site HS11”.

3.3 This new 2fe school has been proposed to address HCC’s objections to the submission plan that there was a 2fe primary shortfall identified in Hatfield and a new 2fe primary school is required to serve the south of the town. HCC also considered the approach to provision of education capacity was unsound as it would not ensure that additional school capacity would be provided in locations well-related to the communities in which they are needed.

* Para 2.13 in the Statement of HCC Property Development Services to Hearing Session 12 Policy SP 14 New Schools

** Paras 5.2 and 5.3 in the Statement of Common Ground between HCC and WHBC relating to Policy SP14 (EX57)

3.4 It is understood that Ptarmigan Land and Mrs C Horton Settlement only offered to make land available for the provision of the primary school once HCC’s concerns were known and that this could form part of the wider allocation for the site of 120 new homes. Para 3.1 in the HS11 SoCG reveals that this was considered to be the only available option, “There are no other available sites in the right places to meet the educational needs arising from the Local Plan in South Hatfield, identified in the HCC Regulation service representations.” Para 6.1 goes on to explain that the new buildings will be located within the land identified at HS11 alongside the allocation for 120 new homes, whilst the playing fields and supporting uses would be located on adjacent land, which is also within the control of the landowner.

3.5 The following specific comments are made on education capacity in relation to Site HS11 (Hat11):

1) The lack of identified education capacity in south Hatfield did not prevent the proposed allocation for residential development at Site HS11 (Hat11), or indeed at any other site in south Hatfield, when this was used as the basis for restricting the amount of residential development at Welham Green.

2) The proposed number of new homes (120) that Site HS11 (Hat11) can provide needs to be commensurately reduced in order to accommodate the new school, even if it is just the school buildings that are within the allocation boundary.

3) The proposed 2fe school should only be serving the need for additional primary school places in south Hatfield and not enrolling children from Welham Green to ensure sustainable patterns of travel.

4) The proposed 2fe school should not preclude the allocation of a new primary school at Land south of Dixons Hill Road (WeG17), Welham Green, which the Council’s HELLA 2019 has found to be suitable, available, achievable and deliverable in 1-5 years /5-10 years (see Appendix G), to meet the needs of any increased housing requirement at Welham Green.

5) Safe pedestrian crossings on South Way, especially for children travelling to / from the proposed school, are required when addressing the severance in connectivity between the site and the rest of south Hatfield.

3.6 We note that the Council considers the provision of a 2fe primary school at the site as a ‘strategic advantage’ in support of its proposed allocation for residential development. This strategic advantage is also applicable to the proposal for 140 new homes at WeG15, as the availability of land at WeG17 for the provision of a new primary school would be predicated on securing an allocation for residential development at WeG15.

Matter 4 – Green Belt

23) In that context, is the allocation of this site justified, effective and consistent with national planning policy? If not why not?

AND

24) Do exceptional circumstances exist to release this site from the Green Belt and if so, (other than Welwyn/Hatfield’s housing need), what are they?

4.1 Whilst we do not object in principle to the allocation of this site for residential development, the approach to determining whether exceptional circumstances exist to release land from the Green Belt and allocate it for residential development in the submission plan has not been consistently applied when drawing upon the available evidence base. There are other sites, including land at Potterells Farm (WeG15), which perform just as well, if not better, then HS11 (Hat11) when considering the results in the Sustainability Appraisal and HELAA, scope to secure ‘strategic advantages’ and impact on the Green Belt.

4.2 The inconsistency in the Council’s approach has not only contributed to a failure to meet the OAN for new homes in full, as required by the first bullet of NPPF Para 47, but the omission of suitable and sustainable sites for new development has resulted in a plan that can’t be considered to represent the most appropriate strategy in line with the second bullet of NPPF Para 182.

4.3 The following request is made in this regard:

1) Any direction on potential modifications to the submission plan, especially on determining whether exceptional circumstances exist to release land from the Green Belt and allocate it for additional residential development to help meet the FOAHN, should require the Council to adopt a consistent approach based on the available evidence.

4.4 The table below provides a high level comparison between the performance of Site HS11 (Hat11) and another Green Belt site (land at Potterells Farm WeG15) in the evidence base to illustrate the inconsistency in the Council’s approach to exceptional circumstances and allocation of land for residential development.

Evidence base Land at South Way Land at Potterells Comparison HS11 (Hat11) Farm WeG15 between the two sites HELAA 2016 and Delivery is estimated to Deliverable in 1-10 years Similar performance 2019 be 0-10 years, and potentially within 0-5 years Green Belt Study The site makes two The site makes two WeG15 more Stage 2 limited or no limited or no contributions favorable Assessment contributions, one and two partial partial contribution and contributions to the one significant national Green Belt contribution to the purposes national Green Belt purposes

Green Belt Study The parcel (P56) makes The parcel (P64) makes Similar performance Stage 3 (Purposes) two limited or no two limited or no contributions, one contributions, one partial partial contribution and contribution and one one significant significant contribution* to contribution to the the national Green Belt national Green Belt purposes purposes

Green Belt Study Site falls within the The site falls within the Similar performance Stage 3 (Harm) moderate high sub- moderate high sub parcel parcel (56a) (P64e) *

Green Belt New Green Belt Proposed boundaries Similar performance boundary boundaries would be would be predominantly predominantly weaker weaker than the existing than the existing boundaries boundaries

Green Gap Development at the site The majority of WeG15 more Assessment falls within an area in development at the site favorable which impact of would not fall within an development on area in which impact of settlement separation development on should be a settlement separation consideration should be a consideration

Sustainability The site has 7 (++) and The site has 7 (++) and 1 Similar performance Appraisal 1 (--) (--) Flood Risk Passes the sequential Passes the sequential Similar performance test test

Landscape Moderate (neutral) Moderate (neutral) Similar performance Assessment Strategic Accords with the If allocated alongside Similar performance Advantages Settlement Strategy, WeG3, the site would with the primary focus provide the opportunity for development being for an alternative access within and around the into WeG3, avoiding two principal towns and further demand upon major contribution to Welham Manor which, meeting objectively although an acceptable assessed need for access in its own right, is housing. Opportunity constrained. Provision of to deliver 2FE Primary publicly accessible open School space on site. Opportunity to deliver a new primary school on land south of Dixons Hill Road (WeG17) which is within the landowner’s control.

* This is inconsistent with the findings in the Stage 2 assessment and has been challenged in submissions to Stage 5 of the examination * This has been based on inconsistent findings in the Stage 3 assessment and has been challenged in submissions to Stage 5 of the examination

Strategic None None Similar performance Disadvantages

28) Representations from Hertfordshire County Council against Policy SADM 34 request the removal of land at New Barnfield from the Green Belt. How extensive is this area of land and how would it impinge upon the openness of this part of the Green Belt?

5.1 The removal of land at New Barnfield from the Green Belt is welcomed so that it can be made available for the provision of a new secondary school to meet the needs from an increased housing requirement in this part of the Borough that will help to meet the FOAHN.

Policy SADM 30, Site SDS 7 (WeG4b), Marshmoor

Matter 2 – Infrastructure

43) Is there sufficient capacity within the local schools to provide places for the children likely to be generated by the residential development, together with other proposals in the area?

AND

44) If not, what extra capacity is required and where would it be located?

6.1 As set out in Para 16.13 of the Housing Sites Selection Document (June 2016) (Appendix C), HCC considers that there is capacity at the existing St Mary's Church of Primary School, which is a 1fe Voluntary Aided School run under the auspices of the Diocese of St Albans Council, to meet the needs from 80 dwellings at Marshmoor SDS 7 (WeG4b) and 12 gypsy and travellers pitches at Foxes Lane HS35 (GTLAA01). Expansion of the school on its existing site is unlikely to be a practical proposition as it is constrained by existing property, woodland and Welham Green Recreation Ground.

6.2 The following specific comments are made on education capacity in relation to ‘other proposals’ in the area, including the proposed residential development at WeG15:

1) HCC, in their capacity as the local education authority, would not object to a new primary school in Welham Green (see Para 16.7 at Appendix C and Paras 5.2 & 5.3 at Appendix F)

2) WHBC failed to suitably assess the option recommended by HCC in their representations to the draft local plan to provide a relocated and enlarged primary school at Welham Green.

3) Land south of Dixons Hill Road (WeG17), Welham Green, has been deemed suitable, available, achievable and deliverable in 1-5 years /5-10 years for the provision of a 1fe/2fe primary school in the Council’s HELLA 2019.

4) HCC has confirmed that New Barnfield can be made available for the provision of a new secondary school.

5) WHBC’s approach to education at Welham Green, where it is restricting additional growth at suitable sites on the grounds of insufficient school capacity, is clearly at odds with its approach elsewhere in the plan where they have positively planned for additional capacity.

6) WHBC’s approach to the provision of education capacity is contributing to the Council’s failure to FOAHN and is in direct conflict with the requirements of NPPF Paras 14 and 182.

Matter 4 – Green Belt

54) If the Council is unable to meet its Full Objectively Assessed Housing Need through other Green belt releases, and given its positive jobs v economically active population balance, what exceptional circumstances justify the removal of this site from the Green Belt to provide land for even more jobs?

7.1 We object to the proposed allocation of 40,500sqm of Class B1 employment floorspace at this site unless there is an increase in the proposed housing requirement at Welham Green as exceptional circumstances would not exist, largely on the basis that it would result in unsustainable development.

7.2 The following specific comments are made in this regard:

1) Without an increase in the proposed housing requirement at Welham Green above 92 new homes, the proposed employment allocation, which would be the largest in the Borough, would create unsustainable patterns of growth through travel to work patterns and an unbalanced settlement.

2) Welham Green is a Large Village in the settlement hierarchy reflecting the higher level of services, infrastructure and transport accessibility (e.g. a mainline railway station). This is a valuable transport resource, offering sustainable transport opportunities that is unavailable in many other settlements within the Borough.

3) Welham Green has been identified by WHBC as a ‘main focus’ for development outside of Welwyn Garden City and Hatfield however, the balance of draft allocations are at odds with this aspiration, its position in the settlement hierarchy and its excellent sustainability credentials.

.

Appendix A – WHBC HELAA 2016 - WeG15 extract

Site Reference: WeG15 Site name: Potterells Farm, Station Road, AL9 7PG

- Site details Settlement Welham Green Ward Welham Green & Hatfield South Site area 7.1 ha

Site context Green Belt Yes Previously Primarily greenfield, with an developed area in the north east comprising agricultural buildings and farm yard Land use/character Agricultural field and buildings. Boundaries are a mix of hedgerows, woodland, fences, ditches and road. Gradual slope to the south Surrounding land Residential to the north and uses and character east. Open countryside to the south and west

Site promotion . Source of promotion Landowner and agent Land use promoted Residential

Map © Crown copyright. All rights reserved Welwyn Hatfield Borough Council LA100019547 2015 Site suitability considerations Comments Policy constraints: Adopted Development Plan: GBSP1 and GBSP2: site is designated Green Adopted Development Plan Belt; IM2 (Planning Obligations) and Planning Obligations SPD; R2 Emerging local policy Contaminate Land; R7 Protection of ground and surface water; R11 National policy Biodiversity and Development; R13 SSSI; RA10 Landscape Character Area: Emerging Core Strategy: CS11 Protection of Critical Assets. NPPF: Section 11 Conserving and enhancing the natural environment. Access via Station Road. Physical constraints: Wastewater: Network capacity in the area unlikely to support demand. Access to the site Upgrades to the existing drainage infrastructure are likely to be Infrastructure location/capacity required ahead of the development. Upgrades can take around 18 Ground conditions months to 3 years to design and deliver. Contamination Potential for contaminated land associated with farm yard area Pollution Generally flat site Flood risk Entire site is within Flood Zone 1 - low risk of fluvial flooding Hazardous risk Site is within GSPZ Inner Zone (Zone 1) – most sensitive zone Other Public right of way crosses a small area of the the site in the eastern most corner Mimmshall Valley Character Area: Site demonstrates many of the Potential environmental impacts: character area’s characteristics (organic field pattern of small woodland Landscape character/features blocks and fenced, pasture, mixed farming, major transport corridor, Nature conservation water related features, valley slopes and floor, urban influence). Heritage conservation Former grain store and farm yard are a landmark within the site. Residential environment/amenity Remainder of the site has no features of note besides some mature Other trees along the boundary to north. Wider landscape shaped by woodland associated within the SSSI to the south and a small pocket of woodland to the south east. Residential development comprises landscape further east and north, with open crop fields to the west. Nature conservation: Potential for birds in trees and bats in buildings. Within 100m of Water End SSSI. Close to Grade II listing buildings

Contribution to regeneration None priority areas Likely market attractiveness for the Largely a greenfield site with no significant constraints. Adjacent to a well use proposed served and popular village. Likely to be attractive to the market.

Availability Site capacity Site ownership Landowner. Promoted by 120 - 140 dwellings = 17 - 20dph landowner (25-30dph based on the developable area of 4.8ha) Any known constraints None HELAA >6 ha so 25dph = 178 dwellings Scenario/methodology Achievability HELAA capacity 140 dwellings Deliverability issues Timing of wastewater HELAA density 20 dph infrastructure upgrades Viability issues Cost of upgrading wastewater infrastructure Landowner timescales Within 5 years Other comments Reduced capacity (from 178 to 140 dwellings) reflects the developer’s intention of incorporating large areas of public open space in the southern area of the site that contributes to the promoters’ intention of creating a stronger wooded green belt boundary to the south, as well as to buffer the SSSI.

Conclusions

Given the site’s location within an Inner GSPZ, SuDS for surface run-off from roads, car parking and public or amenity areas should be suitably designed and the requisite number of treatment stages to prevent the pollution of groundwater.

Residential development of this site has the potential to impact upon Water End SSSI. Development will need to ensure any impacts are avoided or mitigated. Preliminary Ecological Appraisal of habitats (trees, buildings, etc) will be required to assess value and potential for Great Crested Newts. If buildings are to be affected, a survey needs to include bats and birds.

There are 6 Grade II listed buildings to the east of the site. However, given the distance from the site and the size of site, there are unlikely to be any impacts that cannot be mitigated.

A requirement to upgrade wastewater infrastructure (the same applies to all sites in Welham Green) is a possible constraining factor on viability of this site as specific costs are currently unspecified. Delivery timescales may also be affected as a result of wastewater upgrades in light of other sites coming forward for development in the area.

At planning application stage, a contaminated land survey and report would be required and if necessary, suitable remediation carried out.

Delivery estimate: Within 5 years if wastewater upgrades are designed and delivered in time depending on the wider need for upgrades to wastewater infrastructure associated with the overall quantum of development that would be served by Maple Lodge STW, otherwise 6-10 years may be more realistic.

Deliverability 0-5 years Suitable Yes Available Yes Achievable Yes timescale 6-10 years

Appendix B – WHBC HELAA 2019 - WeG15 extract

Appendix 2 – HELAA results by settlement

HELAA Site Address Town or reference or Location Settlement Potterells WeG15 Welham Green Farm Promoted Urban / HELAA 2016 capacity Green Belt stage 2019

Green Belt 140 Passed Stage 2

2019 Update In the 2016 HELAA, the site was found suitable, achievable and available with delivery estimated in 0-5/6-10 years (upgrades to drainage infrastructure being envisaged at that time). The estimated capacity of 140 dwellings reflected the intention to incorporate large areas of public open space in the southern area of the site, creating a stronger wooded boundary to the south, and to buffer the SSSI. In 2019, Thames Water indicates that at this stage, it does not envisage infrastructure concerns regarding wastewater networks in relation to this site, subject to phasing. Promoter indicates delivery by 2024 over a three year delivery period (2022-2024), which is consistent with the LPA’s evidence on deliverability. HCC Archaeology note that pre-application or pre-determination archaeological assessments should be included within all development proposals for the site. HCC Ecology advised that a preliminary ecological appraisal may be required. Surface water flood risk affects part of the site: 5% 1:1,000yr. Development on varying parts of the site would trigger a Natural England consultation at planning application stage for residential development of 10+/50+ dwellings due to the close proximity of Water End SSSI. The site continues to be found suitable with an estimated capacity of 140 dwellings.

Suitable Yes Available Yes Achievable Yes

Conclusion Conclusion: This site passes the Stage 2 HELAA. Delivery: 1-5 years.

271

Appendix C – WHBC Housing Site Selection Paper 2016 – extract inc. Paras 16.7, 16.13 and 16.17

16. Settlement conclusions - Welham Green

16.1 For indicative purposes, a proportionate approach to distributing growth to the borough’s towns, excluded villages and rural areas suggests that Welham Green would need to accommodate between 363 and 387 additional dwellings between 2013 and 2032. Table 29: Welham Green: supply and shortfall against the OAN

Urban Capacity – sites Completions with planning Sub-total Shortfall against OAN 2013-2016 permission

23 4 27 336-360

Key Infrastructure issues 16.2 Secondary Schools Children from Welham Green, and Little Heath predominantly seek secondary school places in the planning area, mainly at Chancellors (in Brookmans Park). The education authority advises that feasibility is underway to review expansion potential and whilst assessment work has yet to conclude, it is expected to show that there is expansion potential at existing secondary schools in Potters Bar. 16.3 However, if Potters Bar schools cannot accommodate additional yield from these settlements, it may be necessary for Hatfield to accommodate further school capacity. 16.4 Primary Schools: There is one primary school in Welham Green which is a small 1 FE school and there is no opportunity to physically expand the school. 16.5 Limited growth of around 80 dwellings at Welham Green (in addition to GTLAA01) could be accommodated within existing schools. 16.6 Beyond this, additional primary school capacity will be required to address housing growth at Welham Green. The development potential on sites assessed as suitable, available and achievable in the HELAA would generate the need for around a further 1FE of primary school capacity. 16.7 Hertfordshire County Council as the education authority would not object to a new 2 FE primary school in Welham Green (replacing the existing primary school and increasing capacity by 1 FE) if a suitable site could be identified and delivered alongside housing growth. 16.8 No site has been identified in Welham Green and limited primary school capacity in Welham Green is currently a restraint on further housing growth.

16.9 Highways: The Highway Authority has identified the Dixons Hill Road/A1000 roundabout junction as a current congestion point. Capacity enhancements will be needed at this junction to enable development to take place and this is already being explored in connection with site WeG4b. 16.10 Site conclusions 16.11 Conclusions for sites in Welham Green are set out at Appendix G.

38

Urban sites 16.12 There are no urban sites considered suitable or not suitable for allocation in the Local Plan.

Green Belt sites 16.13 The following sites around Welham Green, which are currently designated as Green Belt, are considered suitable for allocation in the Local Plan. WeG4b offers an advantage when compared to other sites being promoted for Welham Green, of delivering much needed employment land to support jobs growth in the borough alongside a limited amount of housing growth. The education authority considers that capacity exists in existing primary schools to accommodate the additional pupil yield arising from limited housing growth on WeG4b. The Foxes Lane site is already occupied (in part without planning permission) but the education authority considers that primary school need is already accommodated. Table 30: Welham Green: Green Belt sites considered suitable for allocation

Indicative Site Ref Site name capacity Land at Marshmoor (mixed use, housing/employment). Includes WeG4b 8 80 WeG4a, referenced as area 5) GTLAA01 Foxes Lane 12 Total 92

16.14 There are a number of sites around Welham Green, which are currently designated as Green Belt, which are not considered suitable for allocation in the Local Plan. The table below summarises the reasons why. Table 31: Welham Green: Green Belt sites not considered suitable for allocation

Reason for not allocating in the Local Indicative Site Ref Site name Plan capacity Whilst the site itself is suitable for development, the site does not present any Units 1-3, Welham strategic advantages and the lack of WeG1 10 Manor primary school capacity in Welham Green is currently a barrier to growth, with no site identified to resolve lack of capacity. Whilst the site itself is suitable for development, the site does not present any strategic advantages and the lack of primary school capacity in Welham Green is currently a barrier to growth, with no site South of Welham identified to resolve lack of capacity. If WeG3 45 Manor primary school capacity could be addressed, the opportunity to secure access via WeG15 should be explored to limit impact on Welham Manor. This may then allow for a slightly higher dwelling capacity on WeG3.

8 Also refer to Employment Sites Selection – Background Paper 2016 39

Table 31 continued: Welham Green: Green Belt sites not considered suitable for allocation

Reason for not allocating in the Local Indicative Site Ref Site name Plan capacity The limited amount of residential development (80 dwellings) does not by itself either justify the site being inset within the Green Belt creating weaker boundaries WeG4a Land at Marshmoor than existing or a significantly wider release 0 of land from the Green Belt. A wider release is however considered as part of WeG4b. No indicative capacity is included within this table to avoid double counting. Whilst the site itself is suitable for development, the site does not present any strategic advantages and the lack of WeG6 Skimpans Farm 73 primary school capacity in Welham Green is currently a barrier to growth, with no site identified to resolve lack of capacity. Whilst the site itself is suitable for development, the site does not present any strategic advantages and the lack of WeG10 Dixons Hill Road 120 primary school capacity in Welham Green is currently a barrier to growth, with no site identified to resolve lack of capacity. Whilst the site itself is suitable for development, the site does not present any strategic advantages and the lack of WeG12 Pooleys Lane 59 primary school capacity in Welham Green is currently a barrier to growth, with no site identified to resolve lack of capacity. Whilst the site itself is suitable for development, the site does not present any strategic advantages and the lack of primary school capacity in Welham Green is currently a barrier to growth, with no site WeG15 Potterells Farm identified to resolve lack of capacity. If 140 primary school capacity could be addressed, the opportunity to deliver WeG15 alongside WeG3 should be explored. This may then allow for a slightly higher dwelling capacity on WeG3. Total 447

Settlement Conclusion

16.15 Total potential capacity from Green Belt sites is 92.

16.16 This is significantly below the shortfall indicated against the proportionate distribution of the OAN.

16.17 Whilst others sites are, in principle, suitable for development, limited primary school capacity within Welham Green and no alternative site identified to deliver an expanded school is currently a restraint on further growth.

40

Appendix D – Report to the Cabinet Housing and Planning Panel Meeting on 16 March 2017 - extract inc. Para 4.20

4.11 Officers and Members will seek to continue to seek to secure a commitment from adjoining authorities to consider meeting some of Welwyn’s Hatfield’s shortfall as part of the review of plans for those authorities within the Housing Market Area. It is likely that Welwyn Hatfield will need to make a similar commitment for an early review to address infrastructure issues which currently prevent the borough from meeting the OAN. As part of the review of other authorities’ plans, Members should be aware that a similar request is very likely to be made of this authority.

4.12 Members will be aware that if the Council fails to meet the Duty to Co-operate it will not be possible for the Plan to be examined against the Tests of Soundness.

4.13 In deciding whether or not to submit the Local Plan for examination the Council has to consider whether it is sound or whether any main modification are required to make it sound. The soundness tests as set out in Paragraph 182 of the NPPF are as follows:

Positively prepared – be prepared based on a strategy which seeks to meet objectively assessed development and infrastructure requirements, including unmet requirements from neighbouring authorities where it is reasonable to do so and consistent with achieving sustainable development;

Justified – be the most appropriate strategy when considered against the reasonable alternatives, based on proportionate evidence;

Effective – be deliverable over the plan period and based on effective joint working on cross boundary strategic priorities;

Consistent with national policy – the plan should enable the delivery of sustainable development in accordance with the policies in the National Planning Policy Framework.

4.14 The Council may also identify minor or additional modifications which do not alter the substance of the Plan but which address typographical or grammatical errors, improve the clarity or update facts.

Is the Plan positively prepared?

4.15 Paragraph 14 of the NPPF qualifies the requirement to meet the OAN by making reference to:

Whether any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against the policies in the NPPF taken as a whole; or

Specific policies in the NPPF indicate that development should be restricted. The footnote to this criterion lists a number of examples where this might apply and includes land designated as Green Belt.

4.16 In this respect the Council needs to consider the updated evidence on the Economy Study and the SHMA. This has been reviewed to take account of the 2014 Sub National Population and Household projections and changing economic forecasts.

Page 11 4.17 The SHMA 2017 is informed by demographic modelling from Edge Analytics and considers economic forecasts, market indicators, affordability, younger household formation, the effect of and signals from recent appeals or public examinations. It is still to be finalised but the draft conclusion is an OAN of around 800 dwellings per year, equivalent to 15,200 dwellings over a 19 year period. Officers consider that this would result in considerable infrastructure delivery challenges for which they are no identified solutions at the current time.

4.18 The latest economic forecasts have been reviewed and a revised assessment of the number of jobs likely to be delivered which is broadly equivalent to that set out in the Plan, but with a greater requirement for employment land.

4.19 The Council needs to consider whether or not the updated evidence should result in a main modification to increase the housing target in order to make the Plan sound. The main issues raised by respondents is set out in Appendix A to this report.

4.20 It should be noted that Hertfordshire County Council has updated its position on school capacity in the northern villages. Initial feasibility work shows that St Mary's Welwyn may have the potential to expand by 1 form of entry. This in theory means that there is primary school capacity to support another 500 dwellings in the northern villages. A proposal for a new secondary school adjoining sites promoted around Welwyn has also been submitted by the site promoters. However the County Council does not favour a secondary school in this location and advise that it is also likely to raise highway capacity and sustainable transport issues.

4.21 In response to concerns about the lack of primary school capacity in Welham Green, promoters of sites in the village have identified a number of sites which could make provision for either a one or two form of entry school. However the County Council has concerns about the deliverability of a two form of entry primary school and is not supportive of single form of entry schools as the educational outcomes are in general not as good as for two forms of entry schools. Whilst the specific proposals for a new primary school in combination with all of the suitable sites promoted for Welham Green has not been subject to a detailed assessment by the Council, in theory, around 500 dwellings could potentially be accommodated along with a single form of entry primary school in Welham Green. As with the northern villages however there would be insufficient secondary school capacity to meet this level of additional growth.

4.22 Evidence on educational capacity and future need has been submitted by a promoter of sites around Brookmans Park. It challenges the County Council’s stated position that 500 dwellings equates to 1 form of entry at both primary and secondary level and is the appropriate basis for infrastructure planning in local plans. The evidence focuses on Brookmans Park and the likely child yield arising from new development based on the age profile and child yield of households in the village at the 2011 census, an assumption of child yield for a proportion of affordable housing and taking into account births in the area. The County Council was asked to review this evidence but has responded on the basis that its position is based on the research they have already carried out and reviewed, that 500 dwellings equates to 1 form of entry and this is appropriate for strategic purposes associated with local plan preparation. The evidence submitted by the promoter does not consider secondary school provision. The evidence also indicates that if a Welwyn Hatfield average were to be used, 500 dwellings would equate to 1.13 forms of entry.

Page 12 4.23 The County Council has raised a soundness objection on the basis that insufficient provision has been made in the Plan for secondary school provision. They consider that either the secondary school at SDS5 (HAT1) should make provision for 10 forms of entry or a site for a third school should be identified. They had initially expressed reservations to the policy in the infrastructure section setting out the sequential approach for the identification of a site for third secondary school as it lacks sufficient certainty. They consider that there will be a need for a third secondary school to serve the Welwyn Garden City area but as the shortfall is only 2 forms of entry they are now prepared to accept the approach set out in the Plan.

4.24 The County Council has carried out a search for sites but have not identified a suitable site which could be allocated in the Plan. The future use of New Barnfield remains unclear although they have stated that the site should be removed from the Green Belt in accordance with its Waste Local Plan allocation. However they have also indicated that the Waste Local Plan is to be reviewed with a new Plan scheduled to be in place by 2021, which could result in New Barnfield no longer being required for waste management facilities, at which point they have suggested the site could come forward for housing, employment, household waste recycling centre and/or a primary school (either on the site or through the re-use of Southfield). They have not referred to it reverting to its former use as a secondary school. It is considered that the Council should explore with the County Council the option for New Barnfield to revert to its former educational use to help meet future needs for a secondary school after 2021.

4.25 The Hertfordshire Water Study is in the process of being finalised. This has been jointly commissioned by Hertfordshire County Council, Hertfordshire planning authorities, the Environment Agency and the relevant water bodies. It indicates that significant infrastructure issues do not occur until after 2031 and that the levels of growth currently being planned around the county can be accommodated.

4.26 As part of the 2017 SHMA Update, the Council’s specialist demographic and housing consultants have carried out a technical review of the implications of the proposed housing target. The role of the review is not to justify the target, as this has been determined through the plan-making process. The review serves to illustrate what the implications may be for the borough’s population, newly forming households, affordable housing and the availability of a labour-force to support jobs growth.

4.27 Analysis of the 2014-based household projections identifies a continuation of trends of reduced levels of household formation amongst younger people. Demographic modelling therefore examines the implications of continuing this trend (unadjusted) or making an adjustment to increase household formation for younger people. In this context, a housing target of 12,000 would result in population growth of between 19.8% and 21.8%, compared to the latest sub-national population projections of 23.5%. Both scenarios would exceed the national rate of population growth over the same period (13.6%).

4.28 The proposed housing target of 12,000 is likely to constrain population growth within younger age groups (the group most likely to migrate from one area to another) whereas population growth in older age groups is mainly driven by the natural ageing of the population.

Page 13

Appendix E – Statement of HCC Property Development Services to Hearing Session 12 Policy SP 14 New Schools – extract inc. Para 2.13

the Programme Officer. This commits to the delivery of a 2fe primary school site as part of site HS 11. This provision overcomes HCC’s concerns in relation to primary school provision associated with the submitted DLPPS.

2.7 In addition to the SoCG relating to Housing Site HS 11 and in order to provide further clarity WHBC have identified proposed amended wording to Policy SP14. This amended wording would ensure that explicit reference is made to the fact that:

“a new primary school site is identified within housing site HS11”

2.8 The proposed rewording of Policy SP14 is the subject of a separate Statement of Common Ground which has been agreed between WHBC and HCC. It has recently been submitted by the LPA to the Programme Officer.

2.9 In addition, the SoCG relating to Policy SP14, which has been agreed between WHBC and HCC, anticipates the requirement that additional housing sites may need to be factored in to the Plan. Paragraph 2.3 of the SP14 SoCG contains the Planning Authority’s identification of the fact that the views expressed by the Inspector at the examination suggest that there is a strong likelihood that additional housing sites will need to be included in order to make the plan sound.

2.10 Paragraph 5.2 of the SP14 SoCG which has been agreed with WHBC acknowledges that:

“Additional identified housing growth, however, may lead to the requirement for further primary education capacity”

2.11 And para 5.3 continues that

“In the event that the Council subsequently proposes changes to the housing target in the DLPPS through modifications, for example to include additional housing sites, then further modifications may need to be made to Policy SP14 to reflect a revised strategy for providing new education capacity”.

2.12 At the Local Plan Examination session with the Council on 27th October 2017, the Inspector explicitly asked whether a third secondary school could be provided. Paragraph 2.3 of the SP14 SoCG agreed between WHBC and HCC, acknowledges the fact that the views expressed by the Inspector at the Local Plan examination to date, suggest that there is a strong likelihood that additional housing sites, over and above those in the submitted document will need to be included by WHBC in order to make the DLPPS sound. It again suggests that if this were to be the case then a third new secondary school is likely to be required.

2.13 HCC can confirm that if additional housing is proposed, the County Council would make the New Barnfield site available for a secondary school and as and when it does so it would ensure that capacity of adjacent lands to contribute to the future needs of the District is not prejudiced. In the event that this becomes necessary, WHBC and HCC would work together to

3

consider appropriate revision to the Infrastructure Delivery Plan to set out the approach to funding/planning obligations and/or CIL.

2.14 In summary, since HCC’s original Regulation 18 and Regulation 19 representations, significant progress has been made in resolving education issues with WHBC and the relevant landowners/promoters. In the event that additional housing is proposed to make the plan sound then HCC and WHBC remain committed to working together to mitigate education impacts and collaboratively and constructively plan for additional school places. In so doing HCC and WHBC are positively embracing and putting into practice the advice contained at paragraph 162, first bullet, of the NPPF.

2.15 Taking into account the SoCG and proposed modifications referred to in this Hearing Statement, the plan is clearly making appropriate and adequate provision for the additional school population generated by the DLPPS, and clearly signals the joint approach which will be adopted if additional housing sites need to be considered in order to make the plan sound.

Matt Wood 25/01/18

4

Appendix F - Statement of Common Ground between HCC and WHBC relating to Policy SP14 (EX57) - extract inc. Paras 5.2 and 5.3

Appendix G – WHBC HELAA 2019 - WeG17 extract

Appendix 2 – HELAA results by settlement

Site Reference:WeG17 Site name: Land south of Dixons Hill Road, AL9 7EL

- Site details Settlement: Welham Green Ward Welham Green and Hatfield South Site area 2ha Site context Green Belt / Urban: Green Belt Previously developed: No Land use/character Agricultural land Surrounding land uses Residential to the north and character east and agricultural land to the west and south Site promotion Source of promotion Landowner/ promoter

. Land use promoted Primary school

Site suitability considerations Comments District Plan (2005): Definition of the Green Belt (GBSP1), Towns and Specified settlements (GBSP2); M1 Integrating Transport and Land Use; CLT8 New and Extended Education Facilities; RA10 Landscape Character Area. Draft Local Plan (2016): SP3 Settlement Strategy and Green Policy framework: Belt Boundaries; SADM2 Highway Network and Safety; SADM3 Sustainable Travel for All; SP11 Protection and enhancement of critical environmental assets, SADM15 Adopted Development Plan Heritage; SADM16 Ecology and Landscape; SADM18 Submitted Local Plan Environmental Pollution Waste/Minerals Local Plan National policy Minerals Local Plan (2007): Not in a preferred extraction area. Waste Local Plan (2012): Policy 12: Sustainable Design, Construction and Development NPPF 2019: Section 8 ‘Promoting healthy and safe communities’; 9 ‘Promoting sustainable transport’; 15 ‘Conserving and enhancing the natural environment’; 16 ‘Conserving and enhancing the historic environment’.

Access via Dixons Hill Road. HCC Highways raises no significant issues at this plan-making stage. Physical constraints: Pedestrian footways present on northern side of Dixons Access to the site Hill Road. Site is well located relative to existing dwellings Infrastructure location/capacity in Welham Green, with 92% of dwellings within 800m. Ground conditions No pedestrian footway currently from the junction of Contamination Welham Manor towards the school site along the southern Pollution side of Dixons Hill Road (although within the highway Flood risk boundary would allow for improvements and part of a Hazardous risk requirement to link the site to the wider footway network). Other HCC Minerals advise that there may be the opportunity to extract resources for use on site during development. No comments have been received from TW at this stage.

258

Appendix 2 – HELAA results by settlement

WeG17 Land south of Dixons Hill Road, AL9 7EL (continued) Physical constraints Potential for noise arising from traffic on Dixons Hill Road. (continued): Entire site is in Flood Zone 1 – low risk of fluvial flooding. Ground conditions 2% of the site affected by surface water flood risk (1:1,000yr) Contamination Site lies within Ground Source Protection Zone - majority Pollution within the Inner Zone (most sensitive), small parts within Flood risk Outer and Total Catchment Zone. Hazardous risk High pressure pipeline runs along north-eastern boundary of Other site.

The site lies within Landscape Character Area 29: Mimmshall Valley. This area is characterised by urban-edge influences and mixed farming. The wider landscape is shaped by woodland associated within the Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) to the south. Potential environmental Two storey residential development lies to the east with impacts: arable fields to the north, south and west. Landscape Site lies within 350m of Water End SSSI; within 310m of capacity/sensitivity Wildlife Site WS88 Bush Wood; within 580m of WS212 Landscape Grassland north of Potterells Wood; within 860m of WS90 character/features Meadow north of Peplins Wood. Bat roost noted adjacent to Nature conservation the site. Heritage conservation Site lies within 180m of Grade II listed 47 Dixons Hill Close; Residential 280m of Grade II listed 9 Station Road; 340m of Grade II environment/amenity listed Hope and Anchor Public House; 360m of Grade II Other listed Fairview, 15 Station Road and several others along Station Road. HCC Archaeology advise that the site has the potential to include heritage assets with archaeological interest. Detailed proposals would need to consider relationship with existing dwellings in Welham Manor. Contribution to regeneration N/A priority areas

Likely market attractiveness for the use proposed N/A. The site is being promoted for a primary school.

Availability Site capacity Site Multiple landowners Promoted Primary school ownership Any known Covenants apply to part of the HELAA Scenario/ 2 form entry (FE) (2ha) constraints site (sporting and mineral methodology rights). Promoter advises no Primary school options legal impediment to Other comments initially submitted by development. promoter in response to the DLPPS 2016 consultation.

259

Appendix 2 – HELAA results by settlement

WeG17 Land south of Dixons Hill Road, AL9 7EL (continued) Achievability and deliverability

Landowner Promoter indicates possible delivery in HELAA 1 x 2 FE primary school timescales first 5 years of the plan period. capacity

Easement required for high pressure pipeline along eastern boundary (BPA Comments have advised 3m) ideally capable of independent access for inspections. Easement also for Highways England along northern boundary.

Viability issues Funding for delivery would need to be HELAA 1 x 2 FE Primary secured from S106 agreements from density school/2ha proposed developments.

Deliverability 1-5 years/6-10 years estimate Conclusions Principle of access from Dixons Hill Road is acceptable subject to design. The Highway Authority is satisfied that sufficient space is available for the provision of footways which would link the site to the wider footway network. Any development will need to comply with the requirements of Roads in Hertfordshire. Safe and appropriate access including for emergency and service vehicles, minimum carriageway widths and the types of permitted road connections will be assessed in light of the scale of development being proposed at planning application stage. Visibility from any access will need to be provided in accordance with Manual for Streets/Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (as appropriate). Early consultation with Thames Water is recommended to ensure that any necessary upgrades can be programmed, minimising the need for phasing conditions and ensuring that upgrades are delivered ahead of occupation. The site’s location within an Inner Ground Source Protection Zone would need to be reflected in the design of any remediation, as would the design of a SuDS scheme for surface water run-off from roads, car parking and public or amenity areas which provide the requisite number of treatment stages to prevent the pollution of groundwater. There may be the opportunity to extract mineral resources for use on site during development. Opportunistic extraction is encouraged by HCC Minerals. Due to the potential for the site to include heritage assets with archaeological interest an Archaeological Assessment will be required at planning application stage. The site may be affected by traffic noise. Environmental Heath advise that the site could only be developed if appropriate noise mitigation measures can deliver a development with a healthy internal and external environment appropriate for educational use that satisfies the requirements of the local planning authority. Historic England consider that the site could be developed for a school with minimal impact on the settings of nearby listed buildings. Historic England have a preference for built development to be concentrated on the north-western portion of the site to fit in with existing built development. This would facilitate the south-eastern half of the site to left open as a playground/playing field. It is noted that two easements are required on the land, however these involve limited land take and are located on the boundaries of the site. Once easement relates to a high pressure pipeline. The British Pipeline Agency has advised that a 3m easement either side of the pipeline would be required ideally as part of green infrastructure and independently accessible to allow for regular inspections.

260

Appendix 2 – HELAA results by settlement

WeG17 Land south of Dixons Hill Road, AL9 7EL (continued) Conclusions The promoter has indicated that this (and the Highways England) easement could be accommodated within indicative layout proposals for a school. Consequently these are not considered to affect the deliverability of a primary school. The site is relatively flat and is considered to be suitable for a primary school. The Education Authority’s minimum space standard for a 2FE primary school is 2ha, inclusive of a nursery. The site broadly meets this requirement (easements apply). The site is known to be available for a primary school. Achievability will be associated with the overall level of development taken forward in Welham Green (and the school planning area). A more detailed funding strategy would need to be considered once final decisions have been made around the overall quantum of development in the area. The site could be taken forward for either a 2 FE primary school, or if the scale of development does not require such level of provision, and taking into account any decisions around existing and proposed school provision, the option of smaller 1 FE school, where this is acceptable to the Education Authority. Delivery would be dependent upon rate of housing delivery in and around Welham Green/relevant school planning area. 1-5 years/ Deliverability Suitable Yes Available Yes Achievable Yes 6-10 timescale years

261