DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE 20TH NOVEMBER 2017

Case No: 16/01468/OUT (OUTLINE APPLICATION)

Proposal: HYBRID APPLICATION FOR PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT OF 5 DWELLINGS ACCESSED FROM PEPPERCORNS LANE (OUTLINE), NEW ACCESS TO CRICKET CLUB FROM SHAKESPEARE ROAD AND CHANGE OF USE OF LAND TO TOWN PARK (FULL)

Location: LAND NORTH OF 17 PEPPERCORN LANE EATON SOCON PE19 8HL

Applicant: MR MCNISH

Grid Ref: 517194 258981

Date of Registration: 26.08.2016

Parish: ST NEOTS

RECOMMENDATION - REFUSE

This application has been referred to Development Management Committee as St Neots Town Council recommendation to approve the application is contrary to the Officer’s recommendation to refuse the application.

1. DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND APPLICATION

1.1 This application relates to a generally flat 5.08ha site in Eaton Socon west of the River Great Ouse.

1.2 The north-west part of the site includes the Eaton Socon Cricket Club ground, pavilion and car park with mown grass and nets. The remainder of the site is predominantly meadowland with mixed vegetation plus floodplain grazing marsh. In addition, there are trees near the river, the vehicular access from Peppercorn Lane to the cricket club and a small area of hardstanding on the south part of the site near Castle Hill Close.

1.3 The site lies north of residential properties in Peppercorn Lane and Castle Hill Close and north-west and north of a Scheduled Ancient Monument (The Hillings, Castle Hills, a ringwork castle associated with a Saxon village, shifted medieval village and a windmill mound).

1.4 The site lies south of The Pightle/ Millennium Green public amenity space.

1.5 The main body of the site lies east of a public path and cycleway (reference 194/56) and the path cycleway lies east of a residential estate including Shakespeare Road and Stratford Place. The path/cycleway is largely flanked by hedges and trees.

1.6 A footpath/cycleway runs across the site from Shakespeare Road in Eaton Socon in the west to Eynesbury in the east via Willow Bridge which crosses the river. This footpath/cycleway forms part of National Cycle Route 12 which is to connect north London and Spalding. There is a significant Ash tree south of the route 12 and west of path 194/56.

1.7 Most of the site is in St Neots Conservation Area, apart from the part of the proposed access from Shakespeare Road which is located west of the western public path/cycleway 194/56.

1.8 The river is a County Wildlife Site and to the east of the river is the Ouse Valley Way public path.

1.9 An overhead electricity line runs across the site from the north-west corner south towards Castle Hill Close.

1.10 The application is a Hybrid application seeking: -outline permission for 5 dwellings on an irregularly shaped area of land of approximately 0.72 hectares at the south-west corner of the site, north of 17 Peppercorn Lane and using the existing cricket club vehicular access from Peppercorn Lane, - full permission for a new vehicular access to the cricket club from Shakespeare Road which entails widening the cycleway/footpath route 12 (which runs east to Willow bridge) to create a new vehicular access to the cricket club, provide a separate cycleway/footpath to the south and realign part of the public path/cycleway 194/56 further east and provide visibility, which entails removing landscaping east of public path/cycleway 194/56 -full permission for change of use of 4.36ha to a public recreation area including the cricket club and the land south of the club grounds for use by the cricket club and use of the land south of the path and east of the cricket club grounds for a town park.

1.11 The applicant proposes to donate 4.36ha of the site to St Neots Town Council with the request that the cricket club area be given a long lease at a low rent. The applicant advises that the Town Council has agreed to this and, if the cricket club were to cease to function, the proposal is that the land would be passed to the Town Council for other recreational use.

1.12 For the outline residential development element of the application, all matters are reserved for later consideration ie Layout, Scale, Appearance, Landscaping and the part of the Access matter relating to accessibility within the site. Approval is sought for the access point for the residential development using the existing cricket club access from Peppercorns Lane. A housing layout and street scene drawing has been supplied but this is indicative only. The applicant advises that the total floor area of the dwellings would not exceed the 1001m2 threshold for providing affordable housing (policy LP23 of the Huntingdonshire’s Local Plan to 2036: Consultation Draft 2017).

1.13 The application is accompanied by a Planning, Heritage and Design and Access Statement, a Flood Risk Assessment. The application is also accompanied by a Phase 1 Habitat Survey by Skilled Ecology Consultancy Ltd of September 2015, a further reptile survey report of November 2016 and a tree survey for the site the subject of the outline application for residential development.

1.14 The applicant has not provided the requested ecology study for the larger part of the application site, the subject of the proposed change of use to recreation. The applicant advises that an ecological survey of the proposed town park was undertaken on 6th November 2017 and that a report ,including a biodiversity management plan for the housing and park areas, is to be supplied by 15th November 2017, together with a wheeled bin unilateral undertaking .

1.15 The proposed residential development is a Departure from the Development Plan as the site is not in the built up area and so the application has been publicised as a ‘Departure’.

1.16 The proposed vehicular accesses have been revised by a plan received on 6th November 2017 and the advice of Cambridgeshire County Council, as highways authority, is awaited. The proposed access at Shakespeare Road affects landscaping and an arboricultural assessment is awaited.

1.17 The western part of the site lies in Flood Zone 1 (low risk). However, the eastern part of the proposed town park is in zone 2 (medium risk of flooding), zone 3 (high risk of flooding) and part of the latter is in the functional flood plain according to Huntingdonshire’s Strategic Flood Risk Assessment 2017.

2. NATIONAL GUIDANCE

2.1 The National Planning Policy Framework (2012) sets out the three dimensions to sustainable development - an economic role, a social role and an environmental role - and outlines the presumption in favour of sustainable development. Under the heading of Delivering Sustainable Development, the Framework sets out the Government's planning policies for : building a strong, competitive economy; ensuring the vitality of town centres; supporting a prosperous rural economy; promoting sustainable transport; supporting high quality communications infrastructure; delivering a wide choice of high quality homes; requiring good design; promoting healthy communities; protecting Green Belt land; meeting the challenge of climate change, flooding and coastal change; conserving and enhancing the natural environment; conserving and enhancing the historic environment; and facilitating the sustainable use of minerals.

2.2 Planning Practice Guidance

2.3 BS5837:2012 Trees in relation to design, demolition and construction. Recommendations. 2.4 BS42020:2013 Biodiversity-code of practice for planning and development (2013)

2.5 Flood risks to people Phase 2 guidance by Defra and the Environment Agency 2.6 Manual for Streets

For full details visit the government website https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-communities- and-local-government

3. PLANNING POLICIES

3.1 Saved policies from the Huntingdonshire Local Plan (1995) • H23: "Outside Settlements" • H31: "Residential privacy and amenity standards" • T18: "Access Requirements for New Development" • T19: "Safe pedestrian routes" • R1: "Recreation and leisure" • R2: "Recreation and leisure" • R13: "Informal countryside recreation" • En5: "Conservation Area Character" • En6: "Design standards in Conservation Areas" • En9: "Conservation Areas" • En12: "Archaeology" • En14: "Open spaces" • En15: "Open spaces" • En17: "Development in the Countryside" • En18: "Protection of countryside features" • En20: "Landscaping Scheme" • En22: "Conservation" • En25: "General Design Criteria" • CS8: "Drainage" • CS9: "Flooding"

3.2 Saved policies from the Huntingdonshire Local Plan Alterations (2002) • HL5 - Quality and Density of Development • HL6 - Housing Density • HL10- Housing Provision

3.3 Adopted Huntingdonshire Local Development Framework Core Strategy (2009) • CS1: "Sustainable development in Huntingdonshire" • CS3: "The Settlement Hierarchy" • CS9: "Strategic Green Infrastructure Enhancement" • CS10: "Contributions to Infrastructure Requirements"

3.4 Huntingdonshire’s Local Plan to 2036: Consultation Draft 2017 • LP1: Strategy for Development • LP2: Green Infrastructure • LP5: Spatial Planning Areas • LP8: The Countryside • LP10: Design Context • LP11: Design Implementation • LP13: Amenity • LP15: Sustainable Travel • LP16: Parking Provision • LP23: Affordable Housing • LP28: Rural exceptions Housing • LP30: Biodiversity and Geodiversity • LP31: Trees, Woodland, Hedges and Hedgerow • LP32: Green space • LP34: Heritage Strategy • LP35: Heritage Assets and their settings

3.5 St Neots Neighbourhood Plan February 2016 • A3 High quality design, consider servicing • PT1 Maximise sustainable travel modes • PT2 Parking for residents and visitors integrated into layout • P2 Protect open spaces from encroachment • P3 Setting of River Great Ouse to be promoted as a leisure resource. Opportunity should be taken to enhance open spaces throughout the town, including the protection and enhancement of wildlife and its habitats. All proposals expected to demonstrate that consideration has been given to improving connections for people and wildlife, biodiversity enhancement and visual improvements. • P4 Include sustainable drainage systems (SUDS) with amenity/biodiversity value • SS3 Residential developers and impact on school provision and on GP services, dentists and community services.

3.6 Supplementary Planning Guidance and Supplementary Planning Documents (SPD):

• St Neots Conservation Area Character Assessment 2006: includes the site and land to the north and south in ‘Eaton Socon riverside’ area (3a). The enhancements section on page 11 says: ‘No further development should be allowed along the meadowland west of the river within the conservation area. ‘More might be made of the Anarchy castle site’ (also known as the Hillings) ‘and the Mill at Eaton Socon, including improved pedestrian access at this point’. Page 27 refers to the site and land to the north up to Duloe brook as being ‘an area of meadow or pasture associated with the manor of Eaton Socon’ which has ‘probably never been arable’

• Cambridgeshire Flood and Water SPD 2016 (adopted by HDC on 20 April 2017).

• Developer Contributions SPD 2011

• Huntingdonshire Design Guide SPD 2017.

• Huntingdonshire Landscape and Townscape Assessment SPD 2007 includes the site in the Ouse Valley Landscape Character Area.

Local policies are viewable at https://www.huntingdonshire.gov.uk

4. PLANNING HISTORY

4.1 There is no recent planning history associated with the site. An application for housing was refused in 1963 (application F207/63 refers).

4.2 The cricket club: There does not appear to be a planning permission for use as a cricket ground. However, the club has had a series of planning permissions for a pavilion, replacement pavilions and extensions and alterations, since 1969.

4.3 The proposed housing site was the subject of two temporary permissions for stables and a field shelter but the last permission (85/1473FUL refers) expired in 1988 and the site has been cleared of buildings, although remnants of a hardstanding remain.

4.4 0905002CCA Erection of foot and cycle bridge over the River Great Ouse and foot/cycle link approved.

5. CONSULTATIONS

5.1 St Neots Town Council: 1. No objection. 2. Recommend approve (copy attached): -proposal would assimilate itself in town -satisfactory in terms of scale and pattern of development -request detailed constriction traffic management plan to minimise disruption to residents -the acquisition of the Town park would far outweigh the construction of the 5 dwellings. 3. The Town Council’s response on the revised access plan submitted on 6th November 2017 is awaited.

5.2 Heritage England: The development would not materially affect the setting of the scheduled monument and is unlikely to result in harm to its significance. Much of plots 1-3 is on the site of a gravel pit and so Cambridgeshire County Council (CCC) Archaeologist advice should be sought about if an archaeological investigation is needed for plots 4-5.

5.3 Environment Agency (EA): No need to consult EA as no building/engineering entailed. ‘No comment on change of use to ‘Water Compatible’ town park.

5.4 CCC Highway Authority – i) No objection to proposed use of Peppercorn Lane access for 5 dwellings. ii) Plan of 13th June 2017 of access from Shakespeare Road: Objection. Satisfactory access may be possible but the plan requires revision. The visibility splays of the proposed access can be safely achieved onto Shakespeare Road. However, the cycleway is used frequently and is an important link into St Neots, to include vehicles into this access must not be at the detriment to the pedestrians and cyclists that use the link: satisfactory visibility with the adjoining paths is required. iii) CCC Highway Authority’s response on the revised access plan submitted on 6th November 2017 is awaited.

5.5 CCC Rights of Way: No objection with regards to impact on footway 56.

5.6 CCC Archaeology: No objection subject to a programme of archaeological investigation secured through the inclusion of a negative condition.

5.7 Bedfordshire and Cambridgeshire Wildlife Trust: i)Comments on housing/Phase 1 ecological survey report and later reptile survey: No objection. Agree with ecological survey report that should permission be granted, the housing proposals would have minimal impacts on wildlife and the suggested mitigation measures appear adequate. ii) With regards to the remainder of the application site proposed for recreation use: Object until further information is submitted including a preliminary ecological assessment, and any further surveys recommended as a result of this, proposals for biodiversity enhancements and the applicant demonstrating the opportunity is taken to deliver a net gain in this area.

5.8 HDC Operations- No objection. The bin collection points for the residential development would need to be on Peppercorns Lane at the entrance of the development.

6. REPRESENTATIONS

6.1 1.One petition of objection with 120 signatures received on 20.9.2016 objecting to proposed access road for cricket club, -suggest existing access and informal green play space is retained instead. -The proposed vehicular access is not safe or adequately detailed and -trees and hedges should be retained. -The proposed town park is already available for walks, fishing and views and is therefore not compensation. -A more formal town park use is discouraged and the meadow should be retained. -A more formal park may encourage more on-street parking in Shakespeare Road.

6.2 2.Two representations neither support or object: Masefield Avenue and Leighton Buzzard: - support The Wildlife Trust request for a reptile & amphibian study. From 39 Shakespeare Road sightings every year of grass snake, Natrix natrix in garden and frogs and toads. - proposed access road to cricket club crosses National Cycle Route 12 but no mention is made of this in D&A. No account taken of cycle routes which should be asset to development providing traffic free route to the town centre etc. The application would benefit from enhancing the local cycle routes to reduce vehicle congestion on surrounding roads.

6.3 3.No objection from properties in Peppercorn Lane and Great North Road, Constable Avenue, Eaton Ford, Manor House Close, Eaton Socon, Hail Weston: -support cricket club having long lease for stability of club and help cricket club secure financial sponsorship and grants to enable improve facilities for benefit of local community. - proposal would increase the area of the cricket ground allowing it to develop into a prestigious facility for the benefit of local and regional cricket. main aim is continue to provide an opportunity for the community to take part in competitive or social cricket in an inclusive manner. - club is the major cricket club in South Cambridgeshire and has been awarded prestigious “Club Mark” in recognition of manner in which club is regulated eg regarding Safeguarding of young people/ vulnerable adults and appropriate anti-discriminatory policies. -Club established in 1850 and playing at Peppercorns Lane since 1936. - welcome gift of field and cricket club to st neots and enhance access to cricket club - prime concern is that to maintain cricket club on its present site, with all the benefits to local community. - only cricket club in area: it is important that we are enabled to remain on the present site. This application would enable that. - tremendous community benefit with extension of Riverside Park. -the proposed cricket club road off Shakespeare Road is to be built solely for vehicles with a separate dedicated cycle and footpath for their sole use which will be safe and satisfy CCC requirements - The existing access to the cricket club uses a narrow lane with 2 x 90 degree bends, 3.7m wide with no footpaths on each side for its access from Great North Rd to a gate where it enters a track. The lane has a maximum width of 4m with sections being 3.7 and 3.9 metres wide. 2-way traffic is unable to pass and it requires 1 vehicle to pull into a residents drive entrance. Vehicles, cyclists and pedestrians use the road together which presents more of a safety risk than the proposed 5m width from Shakespeare entrance segregated from a 3m wide cycle and pedestrian path. -The proposal provides a proper access suitable for all modes of transport and the community to be given 10 acres of land for recreation and leisure with the cricket club given permanent residency. -support this application for a vehicle, pedestrian and cycle access from Shakespeare Road to Cricket club - support proposal to secure community land, to fulfil Town Council plans, secure a suitable and better access for the cricket club and the houses will add to the variety provided in the area to meet requirements of high tech companies encouraged to locate to St Neots. - suggest town park should be informal not formal to continue use for dog walking -encourage widening of cycle/path north from Peppercorns Lane to Shakespeare Road -suggest road to new dwellings could be public path with path extension to spread use from existing narrow path -support development subject to: a) Access to the cricket club being moved on permanent basis to Shakespeare Road. b) All construction site access via Shakespeare Road NOT Peppercorns Lane. c) sign erected at the top of Peppercorns Lane stating “No Site Access” for the duration of construction. d) Weekend work on site being kept to a minimum with prior warning of major disruptions/noise. e) The Curly Leaf Willow tree at Peppercorns Lane to remain and neighbour directly consulted on any work involving tree surgery BEFORE it takes place f) retain tree on residential site which may require a deviation of the planned driveway. g) improved hedgerow maintenance and widening of the footpath between Shakespeare Road and Peppercorn Lane, given the likely increase in pedestrian and cyclist traffic and the loss of the existing track h) improved hedgerow maintenance and widening of the footpath between Shakespeare Road and Peppercorn Lane, given the likely increase in pedestrian and cyclist traffic and the loss of the track on the site that is currently used. -concerns: (i) apparent omissions and inconsistencies with submission, particularly tree survey (ii) site access with regards to construction traffic and (iii) the curly leaf willow tree adjacent to the proposed residential site access -Proposed Park - what are the plans for the large group of mature trees of up to 30-40m from the river edge–(400 square metres in area)–on the area east of the cricket ground? - The residential site is approximately 170m west of the River Great Ouse. The site and surrounding habitats fall under Natural England’s Priority Habitat Inventory area designated as Coastal and Floodplain Grazing Marsh- this is probably the single most important factor as to why the development should not go ahead. -Is the “Pightle” Nature Reserve a wildlife site? -we are concerned that survey does not wholly reflect our observations of wildlife and fauna - regularly encounter bats flying in and around back garden at dusk. - note the site was considered potentially of moderate suitability as foraging habitat for badgers Meles meles, brown hare Lepus europaeus and hedgehogs Erinaceus europaeus- we have encountered hedgehogs in and around the hedgerow border. -The closest standing water body was a large 63m by 30m pond/lake is not located approximately 400m north of the site as stated but approximately 200m north of site and 400m north of proposed residential site. Such water bodies could contain small suitable breeding habitats for breeding amphibians such as common toads. -‘Amphibians were not observed during the survey visit’ we regularly get frogs / toads in and around our property adjacent to site. -‘No signs or evidence of any other protected or priority species were observed on the site, nor were there any particularly suitable habitats present for such species’-We observe muntjac deer, owls, foxes, voles and moles on the land. -5 houses will enhance overgrown field and deter unauthorised parking of mobile units -Tree Survey-confusing and misleading– several comments for one tree against measurements or a location which imply another tree. -The site has two trees so the survey is incorrect. -One tree is incorrectly reported as being in the hedgerow but there is 3m gap between the tree base and hedgerow. - One tree is omitted completely some 5-10m from the site border. - The survey refers to a Curly Willow at the proposed residential site entrance. The Curly Willow is our tree and not on the site. The Curly Leaf Willow provides a picturesque view from our lounge window and frames the view up the lane. If the tree were to be removed, the lamp post and telephone pole next to it would become a permanent eye- sore. The tree provides cover to our property from nuisance car headlights coming down the lane - Some trees are NOT shown on any of the site’s plans -the impact table implies the site entrance for construction is via Peppercorns Lane but contradicts our understanding that all site access is to be via Shakespeare Road. - When is construction likely to start and how long is it likely to take to complete? -concern disruption and noise. -construction vehicles should not access the site via Peppercorn Lane.- no objection providing there is no contractor access via Peppercorns Lane on and if 10.5acres of land including the cricket club will be transferred to the Town Council for recreation in perpetuity.

6.4 4. Objections from Shakespeare Road, Peppercorns Lane, School Lane, Old School Gardens, Eaton Socon, Bushmead Road, Hathaway Close, Warwick Court, The Crescent, Eaton Socon, Castle Hill Close, Drake Road and Great Staughton, -The proposal to create a junction on this busy Shakespeare Road bend is unsafe. During cricket matches 20 to 30 cars use the access. At a recent event there were 50 cars. Commercial vehicles access the cricket ground for deliveries, maintenance etc. -proposed Cricket Club access has limited visibility and will be unsafe, vehicles often negotiate the bend too fast -cars already park in inappropriate locations on the bend causing visibility problems for drivers on Shakespeare Road and cyclists coming from Willow Bridge. -inadequate fire access for new club access -safety on road/ cycle way and paths- the east/west footpath to Willow Bridge is extremely well used by cyclists and pedestrians, a large number being school children -the proposed changes will be more dangerous for all users- cycles, schoolchildren and all pedestrians -To change the main footpath into a road, using the narrower footpath parallel to it and in front of the houses for pedestrians and cyclists, would place at risk all those who use the paths - The “back path” (north-east/ south west) is a busy route between Eaton Socon and St Neots town including the industrial areas of Eaton Socon. - increased traffic, noise and adding to the already troublesome parking on the bend at Shakespeare Road. - The junction of the cycle/footpath with Peppercorns Lane is already a blind exit from the cycle/foot path from either direction. The new traffic pattern will be at all hours of the day - including pre dawn and after dark. Times when, during the winter, the path is well used by those travelling to / from work. -the green area either side of the cycle path on Shakespeare Road is used by many local children for safe play in front of their houses. -There have been accidents with cyclists and many near misses -where would housing construction traffic go? – the existing gravel track is adequate for the cricket club, construction & delivery vehicles can navigate it as can fire appliances. -Intake of cars during matches and functions would be a hazard. -relocation of street lamp away from the bend in Shakespeare Road may be dangerous -cricket club will use the dangerous junction of Shakespeare Road by the waggon and horses pub, where there is poor visibility -cyclists use access at speed -increased traffic in Peppercorn Lane, -request that CCC review traffic safety on Shakespeare Road and introduce measures to reduce traffic speeds. - await transport assessment- manual for streets (MfS)suggests a distance of 33m for visibility but CCC may reduce to 20m- why ? -MfS also suggests that that additional features may be required to reduce speed but none have been proposed for this development. -drawing no. 14/49/10 does not show details eg advance signs on Shakespeare Road and footpath/cycleway, road markings on the new junction etc -The effect of parked vehicles within the visibility splay and the possible requirement for parking restrictions. - CCC require a Road Safety Audit to be carried out, but is not supplied- Until this is carried out the application could not be considered for approval. -A better access for the cricket club would be via Stratford Place leaving the main route to Willow Bridge traffic free or to improve the current access track from Peppercorn Lane. -HDC must require the developer to review traffic safety on Shakespeare Road and to introduce measures to reduce traffic speeds. A 20mph limit could be introduced. -object to access/ safety- extra crossing on Peppercorn Lane on dangerous bend, inadequate visibility unless tree and hedge removed, Peppercorn Lane is narrow with tight bends so unsuited to construction traffic, existing problems with refuse collection and emergency vehicle access, suggest access should be from Shakespeare Road, -no specific objection to the housing development but concern that development on the meadows north of the Pightle might follow, -welcome the proposed park on an area which is currently overgrown wasteland, - noise and disruption of during the construction in Peppercorn Lane, would be intolerable and increase danger to pedestrians. - cricket club traffic volume will devalue properties -proposal contrary to policy PT1 of the Neighbourhood Plan as it does not maximise the potential for cycling and walking throughout the site and through contributions towards the extension, linking, and/or improvement of existing routes throughout St Neots” and removes a designated cycling and walking track. -land in a natural conservation area not intended for development and formal grassing over - precedent to develop more of the Green Corridor through St Neots which is what makes St Neots special. -overlooking into garden and living areas – loss of privacy e.g two story property (plot no 1) overlooks -loss of light to properties in Peppercorn Lane and Shakespeare Road and bungalows in Castle Hill Close -concern about lack of replacement fencing for mix of existing mesh fence, panels and landscaping-so disturbance from new traffic near 11 Castle Hill Close -harm to archaeology- The development has a detrimental effect on the history of Castle Hills, a very important site to archaeology and history of the Eaton Socon area. -Dwellings should be refused- The site is in the conservation area. The dwellings are out of character to the local area -Inappropriate type of housing for area and needs of community - need lower cost affordable housing shared ownership /local authority type properties - Large executive houses incongruous with smaller/bungalow other properties at the end of Peppercorn Lane and surrounding houses in Shakespeare Road. -inadequate notification of proposal which affects most of the houses along Shakespeare Road with the increasing traffic volume. -houses will not add to the overall quality of the area as required by paragraph 58 of the NPPF as they will be within their own protected boundary, only the upper levels will be viewable -St Neots Neighbourhood Plan February 2016 (3.1.1) states St Neots has a wealth of high quality open spaces/parks. The proposed plot of land near the cricket club is not needed as a park and should remain as a wild habitat for flora and fauna. -Damage to diverse Wildlife deer, fox, rare black squirrel, numerous bats, butterflies, great crested newts, dragonflies and wild flowers etc -that would be obliterated with housing and cultivation of other area to a more formal grassed town park (already in abundance near town bridge and behind school/ academy and e.g The Pocket park on the opposite side of the river Ouse to this site is over 45 acres and the riverside park is over 72 acres). -loss of trees and hedges - concern about loss of green space. - development will spoil views across the field/meadow to the Cricket club and Great River Ouse and from the back footpath from St Neots and is an important walking route for the Ouse Valley Way. - excess noise and traffic detrimentally affects the value of property-- devaluation to properties as more homes are built with other developers after, reducing green space with this road being adopted as a through road to more homes from the initial proposed development of 5 homes. -no need for this development -precedent for more development in future-Once access from Shakespeare Road is granted, it will allow developers to build and expand this green space with further developments. -increase flood risk -Potential risk to health from contaminated land (from quarry filled with hazardous material).

7. ASSESSMENT

7.1 The principal, important and controversial issues relating to the case are the principle of a residential development and change of use to recreation, the impact of the housing, recreation and proposed Shakespeare Road vehicle access/ revised cycleway on the character and appearance of the Conservation Area and its setting and the Great Ouse Valley strategic green space, impact on the setting of the Scheduled Ancient Monument, the impact of the proposals on highway safety including the existing public rights of way on and adjoining the site, trees, biodiversity, impact on residential amenity, flood risk in the town park and wheeled bin contributions.

Brief Background

7.2 The application follows several preliminary enquiries for housing and recreation, most recently reference 1407290PENQ. The applicant acknowledges that the proposal does not follow the advice given at preliminary enquiry stage but suggests that the proposed community benefits outweigh the partial loss of open space: ie the community and Town Council will have a net gain of over 10 acres (approximately 4 hectares) of recreational land; and the Cricket Cub will have the security of a long lease at low rent, which will enable the Club to plan long term and apply for Sports Council grants. However, a possible sale of land from the applicant to the Town Council and leases from the Town Council to the cricket club are private, not planning matters, and are outside the control of the Local Planning Authority. The planning issues of the proposals have to be addressed, as set out below.

The weight to be afforded to policies

7.3 The policies relevant to the supply of housing (En17 and H23 of the Huntingdonshire Local Plan (HLP) and CS3 of the Huntingdonshire Core Strategy (HCS)) were set against a lower Objectively Assessed Need figure. Therefore strict application of these policies would result in failure to achieve the objectively assessed housing need figure that the Council currently has identified as part of the emerging Local Plan to 2036, and these policies taken in isolation could be considered not to be up-to-date.

7.4 However the emerging Draft Local Plan to 2036 contains a number of site allocations which will meet the up-to-date housing needs figure and many of which already have the benefit of planning permission. As such the relevant Development Plan and Draft Local Plan policies relating to housing supply policies will ensure that the objectively assessed need up to 2036 will be met and these policies, along with other planning permissions and resolutions to approve, provides a five year housing land supply with 20% buffer (which means these policies are considered up-to-date for purposes of paragraph 49 of the NPPF).

7.5 The reduction in weight which should be given to the conflict of Development Plan policies (when considered in isolation) with the NPPF aims is very limited given that the Council’s current development approach is ensuring a continuous supply of housing, and provides a sound and sustainable policy framework for meeting Huntingdonshire District Council’s housing needs over the next 5 years, and the period up to 2036. As such these policies should be given significant weight in the determination of residential development proposals.

7.6 Policies H23, En17 and CS3 have environmental objectives are all firmly aimed at protecting the environment and landscape character. Core principles of the NPPF are to recognise the intrinsic character and beauty of the countryside and differing roles and character of the areas whilst supporting local communities in rural areas. The NPPF therefore has a slightly more positive approach to development in the countryside than the restrictive development plan policies, and this partial inconsistency requires a slight reduction in weight.

7.7 Whilst there is some difference in the wording between the policies written before the NPPF publication, the policies do not tightly accord with the precise wording of the NPPF, however the countryside policies are considered to accord with one of the overarching aims of the NPPF. As such, having regard to paragraph 215 of the NPPF it is considered that when assessing impacts of development upon the countryside these policies can be afforded significant (reduced from full) weight.

7.8 Policy En17 - Whilst accepting the need to reduce the weight given to this policy in isolation when considering the delivery of the OAN figure, saved policy En17 of the HLP applies at the site-specific level to land which falls within the description of being “unallocated land outside of defined village environmental limits”. It is a countryside protection policy that seeks to prevent villages from expanding beyond their boundaries.

7.9 Saved Policy En17 is consistent with the Core Principle in NPPF 17(5) (fifth bullet) in recognising the intrinsic character and beauty of the countryside. It is further consistent with NPPF 17(3) as the Council can demonstrate a 5 year housing land supply and is therefore currently meeting the housing needs of its area, while at the same time preventing villages from expanding beyond their existing boundaries, which is an important component of the District’s settlement strategy. It is accepted that the wording of this does not tightly match the more nuanced approached taken by the NPPF in respect of development in the countryside.

7.10 For the purposes of NPPF paragraph 215, saved policy En17 should be given significant weight (albeit not full weight) and the protection it provides to the countryside should not be discounted by reference to the age of the HLP or that the wording does not tightly accord with the precise wording of the NPPF.

7.11 Policy H23 - Saved policy H23 of the HLP, like saved policy En17, is a countryside protection policy that affects the location of housing development by reference to a series of inset maps showing environmental limits. For the same reasons as given in the section on En17 above, saved policy H23 should be given significant weight.

7.12 Policy CS3 - Policy CS3 establishes a settlement hierarchy, which paragraph 5.16 of the supporting text explains as having the strategic aim of concentrating development in the larger sustainable settlements that offer the best levels of services and facilities and protects the character and scale of smaller villages and the countryside, and it will increase opportunities for sustainable lifestyles, reduce the need to travel and make good use of existing infrastructure. Policy CS3 is consistent with the Core Principle in NPPF 17(5) in recognising the intrinsic character and beauty of the countryside. It is further consistent with NPPF 17(3) as the Council can demonstrate a 5 year housing land supply and is therefore meeting the housing needs of its area by concentrating development in Strategic Expansion Locations or in the larger sustainable settlements that offer the best levels of services and facilities whilst at the same time protecting the character and scale of smaller villages and the countryside.

7.13 Whilst accepting the need to reduce the weight given to this policy in isolation when considering the delivery of the Objectively Assessed Housing Need figure in place at the time of the Core Strategy adoption, policy CS3 in the HCS seeks to achieve the same outcome as policies En17 and H23 in the HLP, but with a slightly different policy mechanism. Establishing whether a parcel of land is within or outside a settlement creates a degree of tension between HLP policies En17 and H23; the question of whether there is conflict between CS3, En17 and H23, to any extent, should be resolved in favour of CS3 through the operation of Section 38(5) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

7.14 Policy CS3 can be given significant weight in determining the proposal, but that weight is also tempered by a slight degree of conflict with paragraph 55 of the NPPF, which takes a more nuanced approach to housing in the countryside.

7.15 Heritage Policies - Local Plan policies (En5 and En9) seek to manage development in accordance with the requirements of Sections 66(1) and 72 (1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 which remains the relevant Act. The policies therefore seek high standards of design which preserve or enhance the character or appearance of the Conservation Area and setting of listed buildings. It is acknowledged that these policies do not include a balancing exercise as advocated in para's 132-134 of the NPPF. However, these policies are considered to be compliant with the aims of the NPPF and therefore accorded significant weight as part of the Development Plan (reduced from full due to the more negative wording referred to).

7.16 And finally, in terms of Biodiversity Policies, Policy En22 of the Huntingdonshire Local Plan (1995) is considered to have full weight, given NPPF’s overarching sustainability aims and the aim to minimize impact on biodiversity.

Principle of residential development

7.17 The proposed area for residential development at the south-west corner of the site is predominantly grassland and scrub with a small area of hardstanding. The authorised use of the land appears to be as a meadow, although part was temporarily previously used for stables and a hardstanding remains.

7.18 The proposed housing site is outside the built up area, which is clearly defined by the boundary enclosures of the residential area to the south and by the public path to the west. The site is not in the curtilage of a building and is considered to be countryside and to relate more to the adjoining remnant of countryside to the north and north-east and adjoining the river, the public amenity space at The Pightle/ Millennium Green and separating Eaton Socon from Eynesbury. Paragraph 4.61 of Huntingdonshire’s Local Plan to 2036: Consultation Draft 2017 defines the ‘built-up area’ as a distinct group of buildings and their immediate surroundings and it excludes land such as the former stable site as the hardstanding has blended into the landscape. Although there is housing west and south of the site, the site is considered to be an important remnant of countryside. The site also offers open views from the adjoining paths, cycleways, road including north across to the cricket ground to the Pightle/ Millenium Green and north-east towards the river and east to the scheduled monument.

7.19 The proposal is not for essential dwellings in the countryside eg for rural workers and fails Policies En17 and H23 of the Huntingdonshire Local Plan 1995 and CS1 and CS3 of the Adopted Huntingdonshire Local Development Framework Core Strategy (2009) and LP19 of Huntingdonshire’s Local Plan to 2036: Consultation Draft 2017. The proposal does not satisfy LP1 and LP8 of Huntingdonshire’s Local Plan to 2036: Consultation Draft 2017 as the housing development would harm the character of the countryside.

7.20 The proposal is not for rural exception housing (policy LP28 of Huntingdonshire’s Local Plan to 2036: Consultation Draft 2017 applies) as no affordable housing is proposed, and the intrusion of the housing would harm the rural character of the area.

7.21 Paragraph 55 of the NPPF states that new homes in the countryside will only be supported where there is an essential need for a rural worker to live in the vicinity; the new homes will meet an established need for affordable housing; the proposal would reuse an existing building or optimise a heritage asset; or the design of the home is exceptional and truly innovative. It is noted that the application is in outline and only indicative drawings have been supplied. The impact on the heritage assets is considered below. However, there is no evidence to show that the dwellings are intended to fall within the exception of 'exceptional and truly innovative'. The proposed residential development does not meet any of the exception criteria set out in the NPPF and local policies regarding development in the countryside and the residential development is therefore unacceptable in principle. It is acknowledged that the site is not far from shops and services that can be accessed by various modes of transport. However, this does not overcome the concerns about the principle of the development. The benefits of extra housing and formalising public access to the proposed recreation land are not considered to outweigh the objections.

7.22 As such, the proposed residential development is considered to be contrary to policies En17 and H23 of the Huntingdonshire Local Plan 1995, CS1 and CS3 of the Adopted Huntingdonshire Local Development Framework Core Strategy (2009) and LP1 LP5 and LP8 of Huntingdonshire’s Local Plan to 2036: Consultation Draft 2017 and the NPPF.

Principle of change of use to recreation

7.23 The application plan distinguishes between two areas proposed for recreation: a cricket club area (which, the applicant proposes, could be part of the town park if the cricket club ceased to operate) and the proposed town park, which lies to the east and south-east of the cricket club area. However, it should be noted that at the proposed cricket club area includes not only the original cricket ground to the north-west, but also a proposed additional area to the south. The proposed town park lies to the east and south-east of the cricket ground.

7.24 The 1995 Local Plan notes that a sports field exists but the site is not allocated for future recreation use. The St Neots Neighbourhood Plan does not allocate the site for future recreation use.

7.25 The use of the existing cricket ground has not had an explicit planning permission for change of use to a cricket ground. However, part of the existing cricket ground has existed since about 1969 and would be exempt from enforcement action and the pavilion has planning permission too. Planning permission was given for a club house in 1969 and various permissions for replacements and extensions to the clubhouse have been approved in 1984, 1990 and 2009 and so there has been a tacit acceptance of the use of part of the application site as a cricket ground. There is no objection to the recreation use continuing on that area (although the applicant has not provided evidence about the boundaries of that original area). If the cricket club ceased, there is no objection to the proposed alternative use of the land as a town park.

7.26 The applicant has not explained the back ground to the proposed use of additional land in association with, but south of the cricket ground and north of the path from Shakespeare Road. However, part of the site south-west of the pavilion is already used with the cricket ground for parking and part to the south-east of the pavilion is already used for cricket and entails high nets.

7.27 The extra land proposed for use with the cricket club grounds is predominantly grass with part of the existing access road. The authorized use of the land appears to be for meadow. The site is considered to be outside the built up area and in the countryside. However, it is considered that there may be no objection to the use of the additional land in association with the cricket club if the proposed use was clarified, and if the additional presence/absence reptile surveys had been undertaken (as recommended by the applicant’s ecologist in the report by Skilled Ecology Consultancy Ltd of September 2015) and in accordance with Best Practice Guidance (BS42020:2013). If any subsequent mitigation had been agreed and enhancements proposed for the benefit of local wildlife. Enhancements, such as suitable landscaping could be conditioned. However, in the absence of the clarify about the club’s intended use of the site and the additional reptile surveys, and enhancements, it is not appropriate to accept the change of use to use of the additional land with the cricket club or town park as the potential impact on wildlife has not been adequately assessed.

7.28 Proposed Town park adjoining the cricket grounds (existing/proposed). The land comprises meadow, scrub, marsh and trees next to the river and north and south of the east-west path/cycleway national route 12. The land is not currently authorised for recreation use but appears to be used informally for that purpose. The Town Council is keen to secure additional recreation land and policy R13 encourages informal countryside recreation. However, in the absence of the additional reptile surveys and biodiversity enhancement and a lack of evidence of need for the recreation area for example in the development plan, it is not considered to be appropriate to accept the change of use to town park at present. However this position may change depending what information comes forward in the additional reptile surveys and evidence requested by officers.

7.29 In addition, whilst the planning recommendation in this report does not hinge on this issue, the submitted flood risk assessment has not considered the safety implications for future recreation site users on the eastern side of the proposed town park which is at medium and high flood risk e.g. with notices fixed to alert users to the risks and escape routes. However, it may have been possible to consider approving a recreational use of the site (if the wildlife survey/issues had been satisfactorily addressed) with a condition to secure suitable flood mitigation measures.

Character and appearance of the Conservation Area and its setting/ setting of scheduled monument/ strategic green space

7.30 Apart from the proposed access to Shakespeare Road, the application site lies in the Ouse Valley Landscape Character Area and in St Neots Conservation Area. The land was previously associated with the manor of Eaton Socon. The space is a remnant of the open countryside that used to surround Eaton Socon and helps to separate Eaton Socon from Eynesbury. The historic meadow land positively contributes to the open, rural character of this part of the Conservation Area and the setting of the river.

7.31 The Local Planning Authority has a legal obligation to avoid harm to heritage assets. In addition, The National Planning Policy Framework states that great weight should be given to the conservation of a heritage asset and that significance can be harmed or lost through alteration of the heritage asset and any harm or loss should require clear and convincing justification (Para 132).

7.32 The proposed erection of five dwellings and associated change of use to garden and enclosures would harm the open, rural character and appearance of the Conservation Area and will further erode the isolated setting of the monument and cause harm to its significance. The open character of this area is important to the landscape character of the river corridor and the well-used and important pedestrian / cycle link to and from willow bridge. At present, the area proposed for residential development appears to be unmanaged but it contributes to the openness.

7.33 The indicative street scene and layout of the housing development would harm the character and appearance of the conservation area as they are considered to show a development of a layout, scale and design inappropriate to the setting. Conditions could be imposed to exclude the indicative layout and design from approval and prevent enclosures and houses from being erected on part of the proposed housing area in order to retain more of the openness and views over the space to the remainder of the undeveloped area eg in views from the paths/cycleways crossing and adjoining the application site.

7.34 The heritage statement submitted with the application fails to refer to the adjoining scheduled monument. The monument is referred to in the remainder of the statement but the statement fails to consider the impact of the development upon the setting of the monument. The erection of 5 dwellings of any layout and design and associated enclosures, hardstandings and parked cars and outbuildings would intrude on the partly isolated setting of the monument and would cause harm to its significance and would intrude on the character and appearance of the conservation area.

7.35 The proposed housing development would project well beyond the edge of the developed area and intrude in to the open area next to the public rights of way to the north and west. It is considered that there is insufficient public benefit (with the 5 houses and even with the formalizing of the use of the remainder of the application site as public recreation space) to outweigh the level of harm caused to the heritage assets by the housing.

7.36 The town park and cricket grounds are not accompanied by information to enable a full assessment of the impact of the proposed town park on the monument and conservation area. The urbanising of the space as a more formal facility e.g. with extensive hardstandings, high play equipment, substantial high cricket nets and street lights for example, could harm the character of the conservation area and the setting of the monument. However, it is considered that if the recreation area were approved, conditions could secure a landscape masterplan which may include better maintenance of the site, which could enhance it. In addition, conditions could remove the permitted development rights of the Town Council under The Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 as amended for works in order to allow the District Council to consider the impact of the conservation area and monument of the town park and secure compliance with policies En14 and En15 of the Local Plan (1995) which identifies the area to the north/ north east of the proposed housing area as an open space for protection. Policies En14 and En15 resist development on open spaces which have intrinsic environmental qualities in themselves or allow longer distance views. Policies En14 and En15 do not apply to the proposed area of land for residential development but this does not reduce the value of the land to the character and appearance of the conservation area and setting of the monument. The proposal is considered to be contrary to the NPPF as it fails to create a positive improvement in the quality of the historic environment.

7.37 The application site forms part of a larger strategic green space: the Great Ouse Valley area. The proposal for the housing is considered to be contrary to policy CS9 of the Core Strategy 2009 and policy LP32 of the Huntingdonshire’s Local Plan to 2036: Consultation Draft 2017 as the proposal entails ‘the partial loss of an area of open space of public value’ and the adverse effect on the character would be significant. The potential compensation of potentially formalising of public access to a large area of open space with potential for quiet recreational opportunities (which would accord with policy CS9 of the Core Strategy 2009 and LP7 of the Draft Local Plan to 2036 (2013)) and the potential enhancements to biodiversity on the application site would be welcome. However, they are not considered to outweigh the harm caused by the proposed housing to the key landscape corridor of this part of the Ouse Valley.

7.38 The proposed housing development would conflict with policy LP2 and LP8 of Huntingdonshire’s Local Plan to 2036: Consultation Draft 2017 as the housing would harm the character and appearance of the conservation area and setting of the monument and thus not contribute positively to the historical and landscape value of the area. The proposed housing would conflict with policy LP32 of Huntingdonshire’s Local Plan to 2036: Consultation Draft 2017 as it would result in the partial loss of an area of open space and it is considered that this would have a significant impact on the character of the surrounding area.

7.39 The proposed recreation use may be able to comply with policies LP2 and LP32 of Huntingdonshire’s Local Plan to 2036: Consultation Draft 2017 as it may, subject to the receipt of a satisfactory ecological study with a satisfactory outcome and suitable biodiversity enhancement, enhance the wildlife value of the site. The formalizing of public access and control over the site by the Town Council has the potential to enhance access to recreation space.

7.40 To sum up, the proposed housing development would harm the character and appearance of this rural part of St Neots Conservation Area, the setting of the scheduled monument (Scheduled Ancient Monument (The Hillings, Castle Hills) and the character and appearance of the strategic green space (the Great Ouse Valley, where it separates Eaton Socon from Eynesbury) as the housing and associated domestication of the site, would intrude into the open, relatively flat, pastoral landscape setting which forms an integral part of the character of the conservation area and the development would intrude into views into, out of and over the conservation area. The harm to the heritage asset would be ‘less than substantial’ in NPPF terms (paragraph 134) but it is considered that the public benefits of five dwellings and the accompanying proposal to regularise and formalise the recreation use would not outweigh the harm caused to the character and appearance and setting of the heritage assets.

7.41 The proposed housing is considered to be contrary to policies En5 En9 of the Huntingdonshire Local Plan 1995, CS1 and CS9 of the Adopted Huntingdonshire Local Development Framework Core Strategy (2009), HL5 of the Local Plan Alteration 2002 and LP1 LP2 LP32 and LP35 of Huntingdonshire’s Local Plan to 2036: Consultation Draft 2017 and the NPPF.

Highway safety and parking:

7.42 The entails two main access proposals: the use of the existing cricket club access off Peppercorn Lane for the proposed residential development and a new vehicular access for the cricket grounds/pavilion from Shakespeare Road.

7.43 i) Access for the proposed residential development via the existing access to the cricket club off Peppercorn Lane-Peppercorn Lane is narrow with no pedestrian facilities and with sharp bends. However, the proposal is to relocate the vehicular traffic associated with the cricket club, which currently uses Peppercorn Lane, to Shakespeare Road. It is likely that the level of vehicle movements associated with the 5 proposed dwellings would be less than at the peak times when cricket matches are played or events are held at the club.

7.44 The proposed housing site is large enough to secure suitable parking and turning spaces for 5 dwellings. 7.45 It is considered that the proposed use of the existing cricket club access off Peppercorn Lane for the proposed residential development is acceptable and it would be unreasonable to reject it on highway safety grounds.

7.46 ii) Access for the cricket grounds/pavilion from Shakespeare Road- The new access is to be located on the existing cycleway/footpath (National Cycle Route 12) which runs east from Shakespeare Road to willow bridge. The route would be widened for vehicles and it would cross the path/cycleway (194/56 running approximately north/south) where visibility is restricted by hedges. A new separate cycle/footpath would be provided to the south.

7.47 Cambridgeshire County Council (CCC) Highways Authority has considered the third party objections to the proposal but considers that the new access junction with Shakespeare Road can be made safe and can accommodate the cricket club traffic. The County Council is able to approve the principle of a new vehicular access to the cricket club from Shakespeare Road.

7.48 However, the road must be designed to ensure safe segregation of the access and safe interaction at the footway cycleway crossing points. Detailed dimensioned plans to incorporate visibility splays between the road and existing path/cycleway 2.4m x 20m visibility splays at the junction of the proposed vehicular access with path 194/56, have been supplied at a late stage and CCC advice is awaited.

7.49 It is concluded that, at present, the applicant has submitted inadequate information to persuade the Local Planning Authority that the new access from Shakespeare Road would not adversely affect the safety of users of the public paths/cycleways (National Cycle Route 12 and 194/56) and the new road, due to inadequate visibility, contrary to policies T18 and T19 of the Huntingdonshire Local Plan (1995), and LP15b and c of Huntingdonshire’s Local Plan to 2036: Consultation Draft 2017. The proposed access threatens a significant Ash tree, which is considered below.

Trees

Trees in the proposed Residential area

7.50 The trees in the conservation area are protected. The eastern end of the proposed access road off Peppercorn Lane infringes the Root Protection Areas (RPA) of the trees [as noted in the submitted Tree Survey and plan]. The infringement of the willow [T7] is particularly significant. However, if the application had been approved, the indicative layout can be excluded from approval by condition to reduce the impact on this tree. Root pruning could also have been conditioned using an air spade should be used to minimise damage to RPAs in this area. A third party is concerned about a curly willow tree (tree T1, category c). The tree report recommends that it is managed or removed but it is considered that it can be retained and that significant trees adjoining the residential development need not be harmed by the development.

Tree and the proposed cricket club access

7.51 The proposed new access to the cricket club off Shakespeare Road will involve the loss of landscaping to provide visibility east of path/cycleway 194/56. However, it is considered that those losses are not unduly harmful.

7.52 The key concern is the impact on a large ash tree at the intersection of paths/cycleways south east of 33 Shakespeare Road. The tree is not the subject of a Tree Preservation Order but is in the conservation area and is thus protected.

7.53 The tree is significant in views into and out of the conservation area.

7.54 The tree should be retained for its landscape value and contribution to the character and appearance of the conservation area and its setting.

7.55 The applicant has not demonstrated that the ash tree can be retained without harm to its long term health.

7.56 It is concluded that inadequate information has been submitted with regards to the impact on the Ash tree of the proposed new access to the cricket club and replacement cycleway/footpath off Shakespeare Road. Harm to significant trees and the character and appearance of the conservation area and its setting would be contrary to policies En18, En5, En9 of the Huntingdonshire Local Plan (1995) and LP31 and LP35 of the Huntingdonshire’s Local Plan to 2036: Consultation Draft 2017.

Biodiversity

Biodiversity and the Residential site

7.57 The application is accompanied by a Phase 1 Habitat Survey by Skilled Ecology Consultancy Ltd of September 2015 and a further reptile survey report of November 2016 for the proposed residential development area.

7.58 The report does not refer to other species but indicates that there were no reptiles on that part of the site at that time. The applicant has not confirmed if the enhancements for bats and birds will be implemented but they could be conditioned. The Wildlife Trust does not object to the proposed housing area. It is considered that it would be unreasonable to object to the housing proposal on wildlife/ biodiversity grounds.

Biodiversity and the Recreation site

7.59 The applicant has not submitted any ecology study of the remainder of the site for recreation use, or any proposals for management and biodiversity enhancement although a study has been requested. Part of the site is already managed as a cricket ground but part is wilder. The site adjoins wildlife corridors, such as the river, which is a County Wildlife Site and includes meadow and trees. The site is potential habitat for protected species such as reptiles, nesting birds and foraging bats.

7.60 The site is included in the coastal and floodplain grazing marsh priority habitat inventory, and is adjacent to the River Great Ouse County Wildlife Site. It forms part of a network of green spaces, identified as part of the St. Neots Green Corridor, and the Ouse Valley Living Landscape. The Wildlife Trust advice that a 2005 report on the St Neots Green Corridor (produced for a group including St Neots Town Centre Initiative, St Neots Town Council, and Huntingdonshire District Council), the site was specifically identified as one of several which had opportunities for habitat creation and enhancement, particularly wet grassland, ditches and ditch-bank habitat. This report concluded that full advantage should be taken of any opportunities for biodiversity enhancements associated with planning applications in this area in accordance with NPPF paragraph 118 which states that when determining planning applications, local authorities should aim to conserve and enhance biodiversity.

7.61 To sum up, it is accepted that the proposal offers an opportunity to enhance the biodiversity value of the site within a key green corridor/Living Landscape area and area of priority habitat. However, it is considered that the proposed recreation use should be rejected in the absence of any ecology survey and the absence of any enhancement/ mitigation proposals by the applicants, in accordance with Best Practice advice in BS42020:2013 Biodiversity-code of practice for planning and development (2013).

7.62 The proposal is considered to be accompanied by inadequate information to ensure that the proposal will not cause harm to protected species and habitats, particularly reptiles, bats and birds and the floodplain grazing marsh priority habitat. The proposal is therefore contrary to the guidance in the NPPF (including section 11), BS42020:2013 Biodiversity-code of practice for planning and development (2013) and policies En22 of the Huntingdonshire Local Plan 1995, CS1 of the Adopted Huntingdonshire Local Development Framework Core Strategy (2009) and LP30 of Huntingdonshire’s Local Plan to 2036: Consultation Draft 2017.

Impact on residential amenity of the proposed residential development with access from Peppercorns Lane, proposed cricket club access to Shakespeare Road and change of use to recreation land (town park)

7.63 i) Proposed residential development with access from Peppercorns Lane

7.64 The site of the proposed 5 houses lies north of dwellings in Peppercorns Lane and Castle Hills Close. The details of the scale, design and layout of the proposed residential development are reserved.

7.65 The proposal will introduce development and activity on the site and approaches but it is considered that the site is large enough to allow a residential development to be devised that avoids undue harm to the amenities of the neighbours by reason of overlooking, overbearing effects or shading. It would be unreasonable to refuse 5 dwellings on the basis of traffic generation, in view of the existence of the existing access to the cricket club from Peppercorns Lane, which would be removed if the new alternative proposed access to the club from Shakespeare Road had been approved.

7.66 ii) Proposed vehicular access to cricket club via Shakespeare Road as a replacement to existing access from Peppercorns Lane

7.67 The proposed alterations to the cycleway/ path to create a new vehicular access and replacement cycleway/ path will reduce the grassed space between five houses (25-33:odds only) Shakespeare Road) and will considerably increase activity on the route e.g by motor vehicles and associated engine noise and vehicle lights visiting the cricket club.

7.68 The disturbance from the periodically considerable amount of traffic associated with events will be most likely to affect the occupiers of the five dwellings flanking the route at 25-33 and opposite the junction (at 2 and 4 Shakespeare Road).

7.69 Cricket club traffic will also travel past other properties in Shakespeare Road but it is not considered that would cause undue disturbance.

7.70 However, it is considered that the submitted plan does not result in such significant harm to amenity as to merit the refusal of the application.

7.71 iii) Proposed town park

7.72 The proposed change of use to recreation would regularise public access on the existing cricket ground, land flanking the path/cycleway crossing the site and land east of path/cycleway 194/56 and west of the river. It is considered that the change of use need not harm the amenity of residents adjoining the recreation land.

7.73 To sum up, the proposal need not cause undue harm to amenity of residents therefore accords with Policy H31 of Huntingdonshire Local Plan 1995 and LP13 of Huntingdonshire’s Local Plan to 2036: Consultation Draft 2017.

Flood risk in the town park

7.74 The proposed housing is in flood zone 1 (low risk) but, according to Huntingdonshire’s Strategic Flood Risk Assessment 2017, the eastern part of the proposed town park is at medium (zone 2) and high risk of flooding (zone 3) and part of the site forms part of the flood plain (zone 3b).

7.75 Table 2 (Flood Risk Vulnerability Classification) of the National Planning Practice Guidance suggests that Amenity open space and recreation and essential facilities such as changing rooms are water compatible uses and so such development may be appropriate despite the location in zones 3a and 3b.

7.76 However it is considered that site specific flood risk assessment (FRA) must demonstrate that the development will be safe from all sources of flood risk,

7.77 The Cambridgeshire Flood and Water SPD advises that a FRA should, amongst other matters, consider the effects of a range of flooding events including the impacts of extreme events on people, property, the natural and historic environments and river processes and should Consider the vulnerability of occupiers and users of the development and include arrangements for safe access and the Defra/EA publication ‘Flood Risks to People’. The applicant’s flood risk assessment advises that no structures or raising of ground levels is proposed in the proposed town park. However, there is no assessment of the impact of flooding on safety of the users of the recreation areas. Nevertheless, it is considered that flood safety measures could be secured by condition.

Developer Contributions:

7.78 Wheeled Bin Contributions – In accordance with the Developer Contribution SPD, all residential development is required to make provision for wheeled bins for new residents. The application is not accompanied by a satisfactory wheeled bin unilateral undertaking (UU) for the residential development. A satisfactory UU would meet the three tests of being necessary to make the development acceptable in planning terms; directly related to the development; and fairly and reasonably related in scale and kind to the development as required by the Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations, 2010. In other cases, Planning Inspectors have agreed that a UU is reasonable and meets the tests set out in the NPPF and Regulation 122 of the Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010, for example in appeal decision 16/00386/FUL dated 27th March 2017 (paragraph 20).

7.79 As the proposal is not accompanied by a satisfactory wheeled bin unilateral undertaking, it fails to comply with the requirements of the NPPF and CIL Regulations and Policy CS10 of the Core Strategy 2009, the requirements of the Developer Contributions Supplementary Planning Document 2011.

Third party issues not addressed above:

7.80 The suggestion that the existing cricket club access is retained or relocated to another location is not proposed by the applicant. Therefore the current proposal has to be considered.

7.81 The proposed town park is already available for walks, fishing and views and is therefore not compensation: The public use of the private space adjoining the public rights of way does not appear to be authorized and the application could contribute to regularizing this

7.82 A more formal town park use is discouraged and the meadow should be retained: St Neots Town Council support the proposal but have not indicated if they have the funds to manage the site or if they propose formal and informal recreation use or to introduce biodiversity measures

7.83 Access construction access details could be secured by condition.

7.84 Impact on property values is not a planning matter.

7.85 Inadequate notification of proposal – the initial notification was incomplete. However, a wider neighbour notification was undertaken and is considered to have addressed the concern satisfactorily together with site and press notices.

7.86 Potential risk to health from contaminated land- Environmental Health Officers have not identified any contamination risk at the site.

7.87 If the application had been approved an archaeological condition could have been imposed as requested by CCC.

Conclusion:

7.88 A refusal would be consistent with preliminary enquiry advice given on several occasions. It is considered that the proposed community benefit of additional recreational land do not outweigh the harm caused by the residential development to the conservation area, setting of the scheduled monument and strategic green space, the concern about the safety of the proposed cricket club access to Shakespeare Road and the inadequate information on the ecology of the proposed recreation area and the lack of a wheeled bin undertaking.

7.89 The Council can demonstrate a 5 year housing supply and therefore the Local Planning Authority does not rely on developments like the current proposal, to which there are fundamental objections, to bolster the housing supply.

7.90 The applicant only submitted a revised access plan to the District and County Councils on 6th November 2017 and the ecology survey and enhancement proposals of the proposed recreation area have not yet been submitted. Therefore the consultation period will expire after the Planning Committee meeting.

7.91 It is possible that Cambridgeshire County Council may accept the revised access details, in which case the part of reason 2 relating to safety may fall away and it is possible that reason 3 may fall away if satisfactory ecological information is submitted and it is possible that reason 4 may fall away if a satisfactory wheeled bin unilateral undertaking is submitted. However, even if some of the proposed reasons for refusal were addressed, reason 1, relating to the principle of the development, the impact on the conservation area and setting of the scheduled monument and would still apply. In addition, the probability is that the part of reason 2 relating to the concern about the harm to the significant Ash tree east of Shakespeare Road and south of the proposed cycle way would still remain.

7.92 It is therefore recommended that, having regard for applicable national and local policies and having taken all relevant material considerations into account, the decision should be delegated to Head of Development and the application should be refused for the following reasons (or some of the following reason unless the matters have been addressed by the applicant or any materially different considerations have been raised by third parties or St Neots Town Council, Cambridgeshire County Council or Wildlife Trust):

8. RECOMMENDATION – delegate the decision to Head of Development and refuse for some or all of the following reasons (depending on the revised information and consultation responses):

Recommendation Refuse for the following reasons:

1.The proposed residential development is a non-essential residential development in the countryside outside the built-up area of Eaton Socon in St Neots Conservation Area which would not be appropriately located in the built up area of St Neots, and would not protect the character of the countryside and is therefore contrary to policy LP1 and LP5 of the Huntingdonshire’s Local Plan to 2036: Consultation Draft 2017. The residential development fails to meet any of the exception criteria set out in the National Planning Policy Framework 2012 (NPPF) and local policies regarding development in the countryside (such as ‘exceptional quality or innovative nature’ sought by the NPPF or homes for rural workers (LP19 of Huntingdonshire’s Local Plan to 2036: Consultation Draft 2017)) and is therefore unacceptable in principle.

The residential development would have an adverse impact on the character and appearance of the conservation area due to the loss of part of the former meadow/ remnant of countryside/ this rural part of St Neots Conservation Area, and the visual intrusion of the residential development in its wider rural setting and in views out of the built up area and from the rural area, for example in views from the public path to the north. The domestication/urbanisation of part of the site and the intrusion of the residential development into the open, relatively flat, pastoral landscape setting would harm the character and appearance of the conservation area and countryside, the setting of the scheduled monument (Scheduled Ancient Monument (The Hillings, Castle Hills). The proposal would therefore fail to preserve or enhance local character and distinctiveness.

The residential development is not considered to contribute positively to the landscape value and character and appearance of the Great Ouse Valley as a key landscape corridor area and strategic green space separating Eaton Socon from Eynesbury. The public benefits of the additional housing and the proposed change of use of part of the application site for a public park (and transfer of ownership of the cricket club) have been taken into account but are not considered to outweigh the harm identified above, and the policy objections.

The residential development is therefore considered to be contrary to policies En5, En9 En17 and H23 of the Huntingdonshire Local Plan 1995, policies CS1, CS3 and CS9 of the adopted Core Strategy 2009, policy HL5 of the Huntingdonshire Local Plan Alteration (2002) and policies LP1, LP2, LP5, LP8, LP10, LP11, LP32 and LP35 of the Huntingdonshire’s Local Plan to 2036: Consultation Draft 2017 and paragraph 55, and the overarching sustainability aims, of the National Planning Policy Framework (2012).

2.The applicant has submitted inadequate information to show that the proposed vehicular access (from Shakespeare Road to the cricket club) would not either: a) adversely affect the safety of users of the public paths/ cycleways/ highways and the new road will be safe, due to lack of visibility splays at the junction of National Cycle Route 12 and path cycleway 194/56 and the new road, contrary to policies T18 and T19 of the Huntingdonshire Local Plan (1995) and LP15b and c of Huntingdonshire’s Local Plan to 2036: Consultation Draft 2017, or b) harm the significant Ash tree located south of the new road and National Cycle Route 12 and west of path/cycleway 194/56. Harm to the Ash tree would detract from the character and appearance of the conservation area and views into and out of the conservation area and the proposal would therefore fail to preserve or enhance local character and distinctiveness, contrary to policies En18 En5 and En9 of the Huntingdonshire Local Plan (1995) and LP31 and LP35 of the Huntingdonshire’s Local Plan to 2036: Consultation Draft 2017.

3. The application is not accompanied by an ecology study (particularly for reptiles, amphibians and birds) for the proposed recreation area (‘town park’ and ‘cricket club’) or by a scheme to enhance biodiversity on any part of the application site. The proposal is therefore considered to be accompanied by inadequate information to ensure that the proposal will not cause harm to protected species and habitats. The scope for a scheme to be secured to enhance biodiversity at the housing and recreation areas of the application site has been taken into account but is not considered to outweigh the potential harm caused with the lack of survey information. The proposal is therefore contrary the overarching sustainability aims of the National Planning Policy Framework (2012) and its aim to minimize impact on biodiversity, BS42020:2013 Biodiversity-code of practice for planning and development (2013) and policies En22 and R2 of the Huntingdonshire Local Plan 1995, CS1 of the Adopted Huntingdonshire Local Development Framework Core Strategy (2009) and LP30 of Huntingdonshire’s Local Plan to 2036: Consultation Draft 2017.

4. The proposal is not accompanied by a satisfactory wheeled bin unilateral undertaking and therefore fails to comply with the requirements of the NPPF and CIL Regulations and Policy CS10 of the Core Strategy 2009 and the requirements of the Developer Contributions Supplementary Planning Document 2011.

If you would like a translation of this document, a large text version or an audio version, please contact us on 01480 388388 and we will try to accommodate your needs.

CONTACT OFFICER: Enquiries about this report to Sheila Lindsay Senior Development Management Officer 01480 388247

Huntingdonshire DC Public Access

From: Lindsay, Sheila (Plan. Serv.) Sent: 14 September 2016 16:48 To: 'Sharon Coe' Cc: '[email protected]'; Render, Kathy (Planning); Adams, Karina (Planning); Lloyd, James (Planning) Subject: RE: St Neots Town Council- 16/01468/out and other applications

Sharon, Thanks for your email.

I would like to advise you (and I expect Mr Reilly will recollect this already) that where there are no reasons for either refusal or approval by a Town and Parish Council (T/PC), our scheme of delegation permits the officers here at Huntingdonshire District Council (HDC) to make a recommendation/decision contrary to the opinion of the T/PC and without reference to HDC’s Planning Committee.

We therefore encourage T/PCs to give reasons for their decisions as otherwise the weight given to the T/PC’s recommendations will be limited.

If you give reasons for the approval or refusal as requested, and officers here at Huntingdonshire District Council (HDC) wish to make a recommendation/decision contrary to the Town and Parish Council opinion, then our scheme of delegation will often result in reference to HDC’s Planning Committee so that the difference of opinions between TC/PC and Officers can be considered in a public arena..

Would you like to ask your members to review their decisions in the light of this matter? regards,

Sheila Lindsay Senior Development Management Officer (South Team) Development Service Huntingdonshire District Council Tel: 01480 388247

I hope this information will help you but the advice is a personal opinion given without prejudice to the consideration of any application by the Local Planning Authority

From: Sharon Coe [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 14 September 2016 15:57 To: Lindsay, Sheila (Plan. Serv.) Subject: FW: St Neots Town Council- 16/01468/out and other applications

Mimecast Attachment Protection has created safe copies of your attachments.

Afternoon Sheila

All applications were approved by our Planning Committee and there were no recommendations.

Regards

Sharon Coe Office Manager

1 St Neots Town Council Council Offices The Priory St Neots Cambs PE19 2BH Tel: DD 01480 388916 Email: [email protected] Website: www.stneots-tc.gov.uk

From: Ed Reilly Sent: 14 September 2016 13:08 To: Sharon Coe Subject: Fwd: St Neots Town Council- 16/01468/out and other applications

Ed Reilly Town Clerk St Neots Town Council

Begin forwarded message:

From: "Lindsay, Sheila (Plan. Serv.)" To: "Ed Reilly" Cc: "Brown, Sheila (Planning)" , "Lloyd, James (Planning)" , "Render, Kathy (Planning)" , "Adams, Karina (Planning)" Subject: FW: St Neots Town Council- 16/01468/out and other applications

Dear Ed/St Neots TC,

I attach a sheet about recent applications we received from you.

Am I correct to assume that it was not meant to be sent to us as it does not have the recommendations and reasons on it yet?

I ask in connection with 16/01468/out Land North Of 17 Peppercorn Lane Eaton Socon but I expect all the cases listed need a reply sheet? It may be tied up with the hacking issue you told us about?

Thanks Sheila Lindsay Senior Development Management Officer (South Team) Development Service Huntingdonshire District Council Tel: 01480 388247

I hope this information will help you but the advice is a personal opinion given without prejudice to the consideration of any application by the Local Planning Authority

2 From: Control, Development (Planning) Sent: 14 September 2016 10:28 To: Lindsay, Sheila (Plan. Serv.); Lloyd, James (Planning); Adams, Karina (Planning); Render, Kathy (Planning); Cundy, Andrew (Planning); Jaarsma, Jacob (Planning) Subject: St Neots Town Council-we need chase if they havent replied

Dear all

I am not sure if you are aware but St Neots Town Council were the victim of hackers a few weeks ago and the knock on from this is some of our electronic consultation letters to them have been deleted/lost.

The Clerk has used the weekly list to search for any applications that they need to comment on but just in case any are missed, if in the next 2 to 3 weeks you are waiting for comments from SNTC and you haven’t received any could you just give them a call to see if they have received the original consultation?

Thanks

Sheila B

Disclaimer

The information contained in this communication from the sender is confidential. It is intended solely for use by the recipient and others authorized to receive it. If you are not the recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking action in relation of the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.

This email has been scanned for viruses and malware, and may have been automatically archived

This communication is confidential and intended for the addressee(s) only. Please notify the sender if you have received this in error. Unauthorised use or disclosure of the contents may be unlawful. Opinions expressed in this document may not be official policy. Internet e-mail is not to be treated as a secure means of communication. St Neots Town Council monitors all email and is not responsible for any viruses incurred by the recipient.

3

Proposed Access

2.4x43.0m VISIBILITY SPLAY BOUNDARY LINE TO BE KEPT CLEAR OR HAVE MAX.600mm HIGH FENCING. LINE OF EXISTING E.L. EXISTING LEVELS GRAVEL TRACK 2.4x43.0m VISIBILITY RE-LOCATE CYCLE BARRIERS -0.125 EXISTING LEVELS 2.4x43.0m VISIBILITY SPLAY AND SIGN POST MINUS 125mm SPLAY

HOUSE E.L. PROPOSED RELOCATE LAMP ACCESS POST GIVE WAY NOTICES TO TOP OF HUMPS ENTERING AND RELOCATE LAMP -0.125 LEAVING THE CRICKET CLUB

E.L. PROPOSED LOCAKABLE BOLLARD 5.0m WIDE ROAD 2.4x43.0m VISIBILITY FOR 10.0m -0.125 SPLAY E.L. E.L. DIMINISHING 3.0m WIDE CYCLEWAY AND FOOTPATH DIMINISHING E.L. KERB E.L. KERB E.L.

No.19 E.L.

2.4x43.0m VISIBILITY SPLAY

2.4x43.0m VISIBILITY SPLAY

No.27 No.29 No.31 PROPOSED SITE ACCESS OFF PEPPERCORNS LANE MAINTENANCE ACCESS INTO CRICKET CLUB FIELD REV DATE BY REVISION NOTES D 06/11/17 NFM Give way markings to top of speed hump added. C 26/10/17 NFM Peppercorn Lane access revised. B 16/10/17 NFM Ramps and kerbs added to access road. A 27/09/17 NFM Footpath diverted to provide visibility splays Suite 2, Clare Hall, St Ives Business Park, Parsons Green, St Ives, Cambs, PE27 4WY

C COPYRIGHT

Tel: 01480 494969 PARTNERS Email: [email protected] in PLANNING Web: www.planningandarchitecture.co.uk and ARCHITECTURE

PROJECT Proposed revisions to and new access roads into Cricket Club field and new residential development off Peppercorns Way Eaton Socon CLIENT Moatside Properties

DRAWING TITLE Proposed Access Plans

DRAWN BY SCALE 1:200 @ A1 NFM 2.0 6.0 10.0 DATE DWG. No. REV. 1/3/17 14/49/10 D Proposed town park Access to cricket club

Proposed residential development served off Peppercorns Lane

REV DATE REVISION NOTES

10 Manor Mews Bridge Street St Ives Huntingdon Cambs PE27 5UW

Tel: 01480 494969 Fax: 01480 493939 Email: [email protected] Partners in Planning

PROJECT PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT AND TOWN PARK, PEPPERCORNS LANE, EATON SOCON.

DRAWING TITLE ILLUSTRATIVE BLOCK PLAN

DRAWN DJM SCALE 1:2500 @ A3 DATE DWG NO. REV NOV 14 2014.49/IBP1