Planning - Civica...Planning Date: Wednesday, 16 November 2016 Time: 14:00 Venue: Council Chamber Address: Council Offices, London Road, Saffron Walden, CB11 4ER Members: Councillors

Planning Date: Wednesday, 16 November 2016 Time: 14:00 Venue: Council Chamber Address: Council Offices, London Road, Saffron Walden, CB11 4ER Members: Councillors R Chambers, J Davey, P Fairhurst, R Freeman, E Hicks, J

Lodge, J Loughlin, A Mills, V Ranger (Chairman), H Ryles.

AGENDA

PART 1

Open to Public and Press

1 Apologies for absence and declarations of interest

To receive any apologies for absence and declarations of interest.

2 Minutes of Previous Meeting

To receive the minutes of the meeting held on 19 October 2016

5 - 6

3 Matters Arising

To consider matters arising from the minutes

4 Planning Applications

4.1 UTT/15/1869/FUL Newport

To consider application UTT/15/1869/FUL

7 - 64

4.2 UTT/16/1574/DFO Newport

To consider application UTT/16/1574/DFO Newport

65 - 82

Page 1

4.3 UTT/16/2669/FUL Great Dunmow

To consider application UTT/16/2669/FUL Great Dunmow

83 - 94

4.4 UTT/16/1997/FUL Saffron Walden

To consider application UTT/16/1997/FUL Saffron Walden

95 - 108

4.5 UTT/16/2149/FUL Felsted

To consider application UTT/16/2149/FUL Felsted

109 - 126

4.6 UTT/16/2654/.FUL Henham

To consider application UTT/16/2654/FUL Henham

127 - 134

4.7 UTT/16/1881/FUL Great Canfield

To consider application UTT/16/1881/FUL Great Canfield

135 - 146

4.8 UTT/16/2492/FUL Great Dunmow

To consider application UTT/16/2492/FUL Great Dunmow

147 - 152

4.9 UTT/16/2432/HHF Farnham

To consider application UTT/16/2432/HHF Farnham

153 - 160

4.10 UTT/16/2042/HHF Stansted

To consider application UTT/16/20142/HHF Stansted

161 - 166

4.11 UTT/16/2793/NMA Saffron Walden

To consider application UTT/16/2793/NMA Saffron Walden

167 - 170

5 Work to a tree - Mill End Thaxted

171 - 178

6 Appeal Decisions

179 - 184

7 Any other items which the Chairman considers to be urgent

To consider any items which the Chairman considers to be urgent.

Page 2

MEETINGS AND THE PUBLIC Members of the public are welcome to attend any of the Council’s Cabinet or Committee meetings and listen to the debate. All agendas, reports and minutes can be viewed on the Council’s website www.uttlesford.gov.uk. For background papers in relation to this meeting please contact [email protected] or phone 01799 510430/433 Members of the public and representatives of parish and town councils are permitted to speak at this meeting. You will need to register with Democratic Services by 2pm on the day before the meeting. An explanatory leaflet has been prepared which details the procedure and is available from the council offices at Saffron Walden. The agenda is split into two parts. Most of the business is dealt with in Part 1 which is open to the public. Part II includes items which may be discussed in the absence of the press or public, as they deal with information which is personal or sensitive for some other reason. You will be asked to leave the meeting before Part II items are discussed. Agenda and Minutes are available in alternative formats and/or languages. For more information please call 01799 510510. Facilities for people with disabilities

The Council Offices has facilities for wheelchair users, including lifts and toilets. The Council Chamber has an induction loop so that those who have hearing difficulties can hear the debate. If you are deaf or have impaired hearing and would like a signer available at a meeting, please contact [email protected] or phone 01799 510430/433 as soon as possible prior to the meeting. Fire/emergency evacuation procedure

If the fire alarm sounds continuously, or if you are instructed to do so, you must leave the building by the nearest designated fire exit. You will be directed to the nearest exit by a designated officer. It is vital you follow their instructions.

For information about this meeting please contact Democratic Services

Telephone: 01799 510433, 510369 or 510548

Email: [email protected]

General Enquiries

Council Offices, London Road, Saffron Walden, CB11 4ER

Telephone: 01799 510510

Fax: 01799 510550

Email: [email protected]

Website: www.uttlesford.gov.uk

Page 3

Page 4

PLANNING COMMITTEE held at COUNCIL OFFICES LONDON ROAD SAFFRON WALDEN at 2pm on 19 OCTOBER 2016 Present: Councillor V Ranger (Chairman)

Councillors J Davey, R Freeman, P Fairhurst, E Hicks, J Loughlin and A Mills.

Officers in attendance: N Brown (Development Manager), M Cox (Democratic Services Officer), L Mills (Planning Officer), L Trevillian, (Senior Planning Officer), J Lyall (Interim Solicitor) and C Theobald (Planning Officer).

PC25 APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE AND DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Chambers, Lodge and Ryles. Councillor Freeman declared a non-pecuniary interest as a member of Saffron Walden Town Council.

PC26 MINUTES The minutes of the meeting held on 21 September 2016 were received and signed by the Chairman as a correct record.

PC27 PLANNING APPLICATIONS (a) Approvals

RESOLVED that the following application be approved subject to the conditions set out in the report.

UTT/16/2453/HHF Wimbish – proposed two storey side and single rear extensions – Melbourne Cottage, Lower Green Lane for Ms. C Saych and Mr S Sanford. (b) Approval with Legal Obligation

UTT/16/1290/OP Newport – outline application with all matters reserved except for access, for demolition of existing dwellings with associated access and parking – Bricketts, London Road for Mr M Flood.

RESOLVED that conditional approval be granted for the above application subject to the conditions set out in the report and a legal obligation as follows:

(I) The applicant be informed that the Planning Committee would be minded

to refuse planning permission for the reasons set out in paragraph (III)

Page 5

unless the freeholder owner enters into a binding obligation to cover the matters set out below under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, as amended by the Planning and Compensation Act 1991, in a form to be prepared by the Assistant Chief Executive - Legal, in which case he shall be authorised to conclude such an obligation to secure the following: (i) provision of affordable housing, unless the total number of dwellings

determined by the subsequent Reserved Matters application is 10 or less

(ii) payment of the Council's reasonable legal costs (II) In the event of such an obligation being made, the Assistant Director

Planning shall be authorised to grant permission subject to the conditions set out below

(III) If the freehold owner shall fail to enter into such an obligation by 21

October 2016 the Assistant Director of Planning shall be authorised to refuse permission in his discretion anytime thereafter for the following reasons: (i) Lack of suitable provision of affordable housing

(c) District Council Development

RESOLVED that that pursuant to the Town and Country Planning (General) Regulations 1992, permission be granted for the developments proposed subject to the conditions recorded in the Officer’s report.

UTT/16/2156/FUL Saffron Walden –Demolition of garages and construction of 1 No. bungalow and 2 No. semi-detached houses –garage sites at Sheds Lane for Uttlesford District Council (Housing \development Team). Mr Wells spoke against the application. Roz Millership UDC spoke in support of the application. . UTT/16/2063/FUL Great Dunmow – replacement of 4 cabins with 3 new cabins – Council Depot, New Street for Uttlesford District Council.

The meeting ended at 2.45pm.

Page 6

UTT/15/1869/FUL (NEWPORT)

MAJOR APPLICATION

PROPOSAL: Erection of 94 residential dwellings including flexible mixed use building (Use Classes B1, D1 or D2); open space, landscaping and new access

LOCATION: Land West Of London Road Newport Essex APPLICANT: Sir Arthur Ellis Will Ltd

AGENT: Phase 2 Planning & Development Ltd EXPIRY DATE: Fri 01 Jul 2016 CASE OFFICER: Maria Shoesmith/Alison Hutchinson

1. NOTATION 1.1 Newport Outside Development Limits abuts onto a conservation area. 2. DESCRIPTION OF SITE 2.1 2.2 2.3

The site comprises an area of 4.5ha located in the southern part of Newport. The site is bounded on the east by London Road and the residential properties fronting that road and to the north by the residential development fronting onto Frambury Lane. The western boundary is formed by Newport County Primary School and Newport village recreation ground with residential properties to the south and agricultural land and the M11 motorway beyond. The application site incorporates a narrow area of land which lies between the primary school and recreation grounds and extends up to the Byway to the west. The site is located to the south of the village centre and to the southeast of the railway station. Both are within easy walking distance. The site is currently in arable use and slopes down in a west to east direction with a fall of some 6m.

3. PROPOSAL 3.1 3.2

The planning application proposes the development of the site primarily for residential purposes which is to comprise a comprehensive mixed residential zero carbon sustainable development (ecovillage). The proposed Ecovillage proposes housing around two central village greens together with a commercial barn / gallery at the site entrance. 94 new dwellings are proposed and are a mixture of open market units (57no), affordable housing (37no) and ‘custom build’ (11no). Custom-build units are where homeowners would pre-order their homes prior to the construction of the homes and become engaged in their design and, in some cases, in their building or fitting out.

Page 7

3.3

The scheme includes a range of house types and sizes, from 1 bed cottages on London Rd, up to 5 bed detached family homes at the heart of the new community. This includes 5 bungalows designed specifically for elderly residents. The proposed mix is as follows: Private

• 3x 2 bed bungalows

• 36x 3 bed houses

• 27x 4 bed houses

• 8x 5 bed houses Affordable

• 4x 1 bed houses

• 2x 2 bed bungalows

• 2x 2 bed houses

• 12x3 bed houses Vehicular and pedestrian access serving the development is to be taken from London Road. A further pedestrian access serving the site is to be taken in the north-western corner onto Frambury Lane between No 19 and Homlea. The homes are clustered around 2 central greens which will comprise public open spaces and provide a range of amenities for the residents. These are to contain a number of wildlife ponds which also serve as surface water attenuation reservoirs, soft landscaping, community allotments and food growing space. The areas also provide designated play areas with a LAP and a NEAP. The applicants propose that a portion of the northern green will also serve an educational purpose, with the neighbouring primary school having flexible access for wildlife education and outdoor classroom activities. This will also be supported by the provision of small earth bermed 'vaulted' outdoor rooms which provide storage for equipment such as barbecues and lawnmowers/garden tools and shelter from rain. An area of open space on the southern edge of the development will provide allotments for the development and will include raised beds. A barn type structure is proposed on the London Road frontage. This is to be a timber clad multipurpose building. It will be the first building to be erected on the site and will be used for site construction purposes. Once the development is complete the building will be made available for other uses. The applicants have suggested that the building could host a number of small business enterprises / community uses and are seeking a flexible mixed use of class A1, A3, B1, D1. The area in front of the building is to include a public open space which the applicants suggest could be used for outdoor café seating. The proposals include the provision of the strip of land between the primary school and the recreation ground for Newport Primary School. It is currently proposed that this land would be used for staff parking. The original proposals took access from the byway to the north. Amendments are proposed that would take access from the development itself. Emergency access for the school would be provided through the car park but no pedestrian access for pupils would be provided. The application proposes that all the buildings will be constructed of kits of

Page 8

components and are designed to improve quality control and reduce construction costs. The dwellings and communal building are to incorporate a range of measures to secure zero carbon and zero bills and will incorporate an in roof system of solar roof panels with enough array to provide all the homes’ energy together with air source heat pumps.

4. APPLICANT’S CASE 4.1 The Principle of the Development: NPPF and Policy S7

Although the site is located outside the development limits for Newport within the 2005 adopted Local Plan, there was a clear proposal to allocate this site for development in the now withdrawn draft Local Plan. The Local Plan Inspector concentrated on the proposed strategic allocation at Elsenham, and on objectively-assessed housing needs, but made no specific comment on other proposed allocations including this site. The Council has consistently granted permission for sites that are consistent with the SHLAA and fulfil the NPPF 3 dimensions of sustainability, initially due to a shortfall in its five year housing supply, but since to ensure a continuing supply of housing consistent with the positive thrust of the NPPF. This site goes further in that it was considered as a proposed housing site in the emerging Local Plan. Economic and Social Role The site has been recognised as being acceptable and deliverable within the SHLAA (see below) and the former draft Local plan as set out above. The increase in objectively assessed housing needs and the withdrawal of the large Elsenham site as recommended by the Inspector will only serve to increase the pressure to deliver housing sites further. It is clear that the development of the site in the manner proposed would make a positive contribution to the housing needs within the district, within a location that has a good range of services which are accessible. In addition to providing to the supply of housing required to meet the needs of present and future generations, the scheme would create a high quality built environment, assisting in retaining accessible local services that reflect the community’s needs. Environmental Role The site is not within a conservation area or setting of a listed building; does not encompass any protective species as confirmed by the ecology report; and does not involve the loss of any significant high quality mature trees. All vegetation on the boundaries will be retained and the development of the site has been designed to have only a minimal impact on visual amenities. As such, the development of the site will provide new housing within a sustainable location whilst at the same time contribute to protecting and enhancing natural, built and historic environment. Importantly, the proposed development is proposed to be carbon neutral, as yet unseen in Uttlesford, and has been designed by the leading architects in this field – ZEDfactory – demonstrating the commitment of the Trustees to provide an exemplar of sustainable development on the site. This is a key element of the Design and Access Statement, to which reference is made on this issue.

Page 9

The Principle of the Development: SHLAA The site is shown as site NEW2 within the SHLAA. In the SHLAA assessment, the site was considered suitable, available and achievable, and it is worth noting that the SHLAA panel thought the site was generally an appropriate one for development although there was some concern about access from London Road. It noted that following the consultation on site allocations in January 2012 the site was considered appropriate for development and included as a proposed allocation in the Proposals for a Draft Local Plan June 2012. Access and Transport Impact The submitted Transport Assessment has examined the scheme within its transport context and concludes that the site is well located in terms of Newport Railway Station which is just over 200 metres to the east and bus services. Bus stops are located along London Road with the nearest being within 100 metres to the north of the site. The projected vehicle trips for the proposed development are not expected to result in a significant traffic impact on London Road, and the development is considered to be acceptable in terms of highway capacity, highway safety, and neighbouring amenity. The new access junction to serve the development site from London Road does not include a right turn lane but is considered to be satisfactory. The new internal road and parking layout of the proposed development is satisfactory. It exceeds Essex’s minimum requirement for minor access roads, is navigable by a large refuse vehicle, and all identified parking opportunities are usable. The roads however are not to be put forward for adoption. The proposal provides 37 affordable houses and therefore meets the Council’s policy requirement of 40%. These are to be provided throughout the development and will include a range of sizes as agreed with the Council’s housing development officers. Ecology There are no protected species present on the site itself and the proposals incorporate appropriate mitigation in respect of badgers together with ecological enhancement measures. Landscaping and Trees The submitted arboricultural report notes that the southern boundary is delineated by a large and apparently ancient ditch with numerous trees, many of which represent very fine specimens, and that access to the field is via a 22m wide strip of land that is also sown with wheat that extends westwards to a gravelled track which is flanked by established hedging and trees. Trees are noted more sporadically along the northern and eastern boundaries. Flood Risk and Drainage

Page 10

The submitted flood risk assessment includes an assessment of the existing flood risk from the potential sources and an assessment of the residual flood risk from the same sources following construction of the development and implementation of the mitigation measures within the proposed drainage network. The site is located entirely within the Environment Agency’s flood zone 1, and proposals puts forward SUDS drainage techniques, and methodology to ensure that discharge from the site is restricted to an acceptable greenfield runoff rate. Design Matters Design is considered in depth within the submitted Design and Access Statement. Consideration has been given to the impact on adjacent existing residential properties and the scheme has been designed to ensure 25m back to back distances, and 35m where there are 3 storey elements. In addition a minimum of 15m garden depths has been incorporated. In relation to the relationship with properties fronting Frambury Lane, back to back distances exceed 25m, and it is proposed to retain existing vegetation and trees on the boundary where possible. With regard to properties fronting London Road, again back to back distances exceed 25m taking account of levels. Noise The site is located close to the M11 and noise impact has been assessed. The site will therefore be based on the new guidance in BS 8233:2014 which notes that the site could be classified as 'urban areas adjoining the strategic transport network' thus higher than 55dBA levels can be permitted. The report notes that noise levels are slightly above the 55dBA levels, but puts forward mitigating measures to overcome this. Air Quality The Air Quality report notes that potential construction phase air quality impacts from fugitive dust emissions were assessed as a result of earthworks, construction and trackout activities, and concluded that the use of good practice control measures would provide suitable mitigation for a development of this size and nature and reduce potential impacts to an acceptable level. It also assessed potential impacts during the operational phase of the development which occur due to road traffic exhaust emissions associated with vehicles travelling to and from the site, in order to quantify pollutant levels with and without the proposals. This indicated impacts were not predicted to be significant at any sensitive location in the vicinity of the site. Additionally, exceedances of the air quality standard were not predicted at any location across the development. As such, it concludes that the proposed location is considered suitable for residential usage and mitigation measures are not required to protect future users from poor air quality, and that based on the assessment results, air quality issues are not considered a constraint to planning consent for the proposed development. Heritage In accordance with government policy (National Planning Policy Framework), a Heritage Assessment has been undertaken and draws together the available archaeological, historic, topographic and land-use information in order to clarify the heritage significance and archaeological potential of the site. The Assessment

Page 11

confirms that:

• The site does not contain any designated heritage assets (i.e. World Heritage Site, Scheduled Monument, Registered Historic Park, Registered Historic Battlefield, Listed Building or Conservation Area).

• No harm to the setting or significance of nearby listed buildings would be caused by development of the site. Therefore development on the site would be in accordance with policies contained within NPPF. In addition the special architectural and historic interest of the nearby listed buildings and their settings would be preserved in accordance with the duties laid out in the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990. The development of this site also accords with local policy in relation to heritage assets.

• No harm to the setting or significance of the Newport Conservation Area would be caused by development of the site. Therefore development on the site would be in accordance with policies contained within NPPF. In addition the special character and appearance of the nearby Conservation Area and its setting would be preserved in accordance with the duties laid out in the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990. The development of this site also accords with local policy in relation to heritage assets.

• Some harm to the aesthetic significance of a handful of non-designated heritage assets would be caused by development of the site. However it is considered that this harm is minimal and a balanced judgment must be reached regarding the acceptability of this level of harm. Any harm may be outweighed by the wider public benefits of the scheme or mitigated through sensitive scheme layout, scale and design.

• Based upon recorded archaeological information from the surrounding area, the site is considered to have an overall low potential to contain archaeological remains of significance.

• In view of the potential for the site to contain heritage assets of archaeological interest of regional and local importance, and the likely impact upon these by development, the local planning authority's archaeological advisor may advise on appropriate mitigation response to offset this impact, a requirement for a programme of archaeological works to secure their preservation by record in advance of, or during, development would be recommended as a condition to be attached to any planning consent granted.

School Land Detailed discussions have been held with the adjacent Newport Primary School, resulting in the offer of an area of 0.36ha of land to the school, which will include landscaping and additional parking for the school. In addition, use of the proposed open spaces within the development has been offered to the school as part of the proposed Community Land Trust set up for the benefit of the school and residents of the new homes.

5. RELEVANT SITE HISTORY 5.1 The site has no relevant planning history. 6. POLICIES

Page 12

6.1 National Policies - National Planning Policy Framework 6.2 Uttlesford Local Plan (2005) - Policy S3 – Other Development Limits

- Policy S7 - Countryside - Policy GEN1 – Access, Policy GEN2 – Design, - Policy GEN3 – Flood Protection - Policy GEN4 – Good Neighbourliness, - Policy GEN5 – Light Pollution, - Policy GEN6 – Infrastructure Provision to Support Development - Policy GEN7 – Nature Conservation, - Policy GEN8 – Vehicle Parking, - Policy ENV5 – Protection of Agricultural Land, - Policy ENV14 – Contaminated Land, - Policy ENV15 – Renewable Energy, - Policy H1 – Housing Development, - Policy H3 – New Houses within Development Limits, - Policy H9 – Affordable Housing, - Policy H10 – Housing Mix

7. PARISH COUNCIL COMMENTS 7.1 Original Comments (4 November 2015)

Requested that the application was withdrawn because it was materially incorrect in respect of the access point is where there are serious flooding issues which were being investigated by Essex County Council; the site plan is inaccurate and incorporated highway land; the location of some of the swales and lack of confirmation from Anglian Water about the existing facility. Second Response: April 2016: Newport Parish Council set out its generic issues in Appendix A. It also expresses its major concerns in the following submission where we set out the detailed requirements that we require to be imposed on the applicant should UDC consider the scheme is acceptable. The Council requires UDC to gain and provide a response to each of our individual major concerns. The Parish Council has set out below, in Part 1, the key issues together with our requirements of the applicant, that we require the District Council to impose on the applicant, as pre- conditions for development. Issue Road Safety and Pedestrian Safety - Access to London Road. The proposal increases, one road and two parking accesses to a stretch of London Road within 50m of an existing crossroads. This is not safe. There is no proposal for a pedestrian crossing off London Road for new residents. Requirement The east side of the proposal should be redesigned and a new scheme be agreed to:

• Include a pedestrian crossing on London Road

Page 13

• Move the main access further from the Frambury Land junction

• Change access to the site to a roundabout

• Include safe pedestrian crossing off access road from west side of London Road.

Issue Road and pedestrian safety within site, part 1. The proposal only uses traffic tables in certain site areas but does not include further traffic calming. Additionally, the site has not included a "safe drop zone" for the Primary School. Requirement That the applicant increases the number of traffic tables on the road system. Further, that the scheme is redesigned on the west side to include:

• Safe drop zone for the School.

• Pedestrian crossing to manage safety issues created by parking spaces 59-64 (marked green triangle as map submission)

Issue Addition of new school access to south east corner of corner site is impractical to the existing school access, The detail regarding footpath to and the bridle path (Frambury Lane) is insufficient to determine and guarantee safe access to the school. Requirement That the footpath and access point to the south east corner is set out in detail to meet the safety and child welfare requirements of the Newport Primary School governors. The applicant is required to set out in detail the proposed footpath to bridle path such that:

• The pathway is protected from vehicles by use of a short fence

• The pathway is further protected by the use of non slip surfaces that are also DDA compliant

• The applicant provides the Primary School with fences to the south boundary as agreed by school governors to provide security for the school's pupils.

Issue The proposal of a new car park for School and footpath do not link to the village recreation ground that is already used for School car parking. Requirement

• The applicant agrees with the Parish Council that a fully ODA compliant access for pedestrians to its recreation ground.

• The applicant also agrees with the Parish Council, prior to building commencement, a ODA compliant provision of marked car parking to include the existing recreation ground as well.

• The applicant provides lighting for the car park including the recreation ground car park and footpath to be adopted by the Parish Council.

Issue Access to Newport Recreation Ground and provision of safe access to sporting and recreational facilities is inadequate as proposed. The applicant's provision of sporting facilities is not specified in detail and the applicant has not yet consulted directly with the village Sports Committee. Requirement That the applicant must provide access points to be agreed with the Parish

Page 14

Council. Additionally the applicant must agree with the Parish Council and set out in detail in its proposals how the monies due from this proposal will be provided to Newport Parish Council and how this will be used (marked pink triangle on map submission) Waste water and grey water Issue The Parish Council believes the provision of water disposal is not clear and adequately set out in the proposal. The maintenance of the storage system is not included in detail. Requirement The applicant is required to set out the maintenance agreement in detail, including how the residents will fund the work and importantly how often the maintenance will be undertaken. Issue The applicant states a grey water run off pipe will be required to cross London Road and access the River Cam by cutting through the village Common which is owned by Newport as common land (Orange triangle on map submission) Requirement The applicant must agree, in advance, with the Parish Council its proposal for destruction of Newport's Village Common to include:

• Financial compensation for the use of village land.

• An enforceable agreement for making good the damage caused to Newport's Village Common.

• Provision of improvements to the River Cam to prevent additional flooding caused by increased water to the satisfaction of the Environment Agency,

Issue The applicant does not own all the land set out in its proposal, specifically land adjacent to London Road, currently used as verge, footpath and parking for London Road residents. (pink square on map submission). Requirement The applicant provides (a) recompense to ECC (land owner) and (b) parking spaces in the proposal for the five houses on London Road marked on our plan, copy submission in green (Appendix B) Issue The applicant has designed open areas including ponds, play areas and allotments. The Parish Council believes the ponds provide a significant safety risk and maintenance of those ponds and playgrounds is not detailed in the proposal, Requirement The Parish Council believes a detailed maintenance document must be produced to include:

• Replacement of ponds with wetland areas to compliment green areas such that the safety issue provided by ponds is removed.

• Full detailed maintenance of the whole green areas such that they are maintained for residents benefits for the fullness of time. For example, the establishment of a costed and agreed contract with a Newport based company paid for by agreed resident contributions.

Issue Fences to east boundary of the Newport Recreation Ground have not needed to prevent balls entering gardens as none currently exist. The boundary is significantly higher (in excess of 10ft) of the proposed gardens to units 33-41(green square on map submission. Requirement

Page 15

That the applicant provides a 3m wire fence to the east recreation ground boundary together with detail of the space between units 33-41and the boundary. Sewage and Foul Water Issue The detail within the scheme in respect to sewage and the impact on Newport is not adequate. Requirement That the applicant must provide detail on how the holding tank would work and how this would not overload the village sewage system. The applicant must provide details to explain how the flow of sewage will not cause detriment to Newport residents as a direct result of the proposal. Issue The village sewage system is currently overloaded. Requirement That the applicant must set out how the monies raised by the scheme will be used to enhance the sewer and sewage system. Further Comments: May 2016 Newport Parish Council opposes the application for the following reasons:

1. The proposed development would be outside the village development limits and is not compatible with the character of the village.

2. As UDC has a five year land supply, development should not be allowed outside the development limit.

3. Health and safety issues with the two ponds 4. Ideally the proposed new car park should be a shared facility as we have

pointed out in the past. We anticipate that people from this development and others will use the recreation ground, therefore usage will increase.

5. There are some concerns that the proposed new access from London Road is too close to Frambury Lane and should be moved further south.

6. The suggested drop-off point (off the middle of Frambury Lane) for the School would aggravate the existing traffic flow when parents take children to the school.

7. We note it is intended to improve access from the front of the school to the recreation ground and this should be constructed to recognised adopted standards.

8. The proposed site is currently valuable arable land. We are concerned that this will be lost.

9. The general consensus is the proposed design is totally out of keeping with the village. This will effectively become an isolated community.

10. You should be aware that we do have serious flooding in London Road (as shown on the photographs submitted by the Parish Council). The catchment area of water includes the said site and the land drainage from the motorway and recreation ground. We are currently investigating the drainage details and will advise you of our consultant's investigation. We have the gravest concern that any additional surface water discharge into the Cam will exacerbate flooding all the way through the village and particularly that at Bridge End where the residents are in constant threat of flooding.

11. The plans indicate that you are only allowing for one off road parking space for detached houses and there is no provision for visitor parking. The houses should be set back to accommodate parking for two vehicles on the driveways.

Page 16

12. There are no turning heads indicated outside of properties No. 33, 67 and 76.

13. Your site plan is incorrect in that it includes London Road as being part of the site (see page 24 Design and Access statement)

14. Some of the properties have excessive rear gardens. Could the land be put to better use?

15. The roads we understand are not being built to adoptable standards. Therefore, who will maintain them (a maintenance company will have to set up a service charge for the development)

16. There is insufficient space for refuse bins; each house has to accommodate three large bins and one small caddie.

17. We would question the longevity of the solar panels as against standard roof tiles.

18. The central reservation in London Road would be a hazard and should be removed.

19. We note the surface water modelling is preliminary and there are no levels shown between the River Cam and London Road.

20. The sewage system in Newport is currently inadequate. Anglian Water is fully aware of this and at times untreated products have been taken away by tanker.

21. There is a 4% slope from London Road up into the site. This represents a hazard in icy weather conditions.

22. The village green with earth shelters (page 31 of the Design and Access statement). They would appear to be caves. We already have some issues with youngsters building camps and general antisocial behaviour in Newport and this could add to these problems.

23. We would question whether playground facilities are required within this development as it is in close proximity to the recreation ground.

24. The terraced properties do not appear to have access to their rear gardens except through the living accommodation which is totally unacceptable.

25. We question whether there should be a rear fire path to the terraced properties.

26. The house plan on page 24 of the Design and Access statement has been incorrectly printed.

27. There are no landscaping details and the scale of the layout plan is too small to consider objectively.

28. What is the strip of land on the northern boundary of plot 76? 29. What fencing will be provided to the swale in London Road as this could be

a health and safety issue the same as the two ponds on the site. 30. Please identify the direct access from the ECO village to the recreation

ground. Further comments following amended Plans - 1 June 2016 Newport Parish Council has been approached by residents of the village who have expressed various views in opposition to the scheme. The Council has met and discussed the points which it wishes to raise. The Council sets out its specific points below and requires UDC to gain and provide a response to each of our individual major concerns 1. Land supply The proposed development would be outside the village development limit. The site is currently good arable land. Policy ENVS states Land Development of the best and most versatile agricultural land will only be permitted where

Page 17

opportunities have been assessed for accommodating development on previously developed sites or within existing development limits. Where development of agricultural land is required, developers should seek to use areas of poorer quality except where other sustainability considerations suggest otherwise. At the meeting of the UDC Planning Policy Working Group meeting on 9 June it was stated that the District Council has achieved their five year land supply and because this has been met appeals are now being turned down. 2. Issues raised by Essex County Council The Parish Council does not believe that the details provided by Paul Mew Associates have addressed the issues raised by Essex County Council in their letter of 31 March 2016. 3. Integration with the village The layout, density, design, materials and visual appearance of the proposals are totally inappropriate for the village. The design should be sympathetic to the village, in keeping with the surrounding area, and compatible with the character of the village. Planning Policy S7 states "Development will only be permitted if its appearance protects or enhances the particular character of the part of the countryside within which it is set or there are special reasons why the development in the form proposed needs to be there" and Policy GEN2a states "Design Development will not be permitted unless it is compatible with the scale, form, layout, appearance and materials of surrounding buildings; This could effectively become a separate community. In the past, three planning applications have been submitted for this site and these have all been refused for a number of reasons, 4. Parking The parking provision is inadequate for the properties; tandem parking is unworkable. The swept path analysis has taken no account of parked cars. There is insufficient parking for the commercial building. Restrictions should be put in place initially by the developers to prevent this site being used by people travelling from the railway station. 5. Land grab (a) The applicant does not own all the land set out in its proposal, specifically land adjacent to London Road, currently used as verge, footpath and parking for London Road residents. Requirement That the applicant provides (a) recompense to ECC (land owner) and (b) parking spaces in the proposal for five houses on London Road. (b) The Common is owned by the Parish Council and there has been no consultation with them. (c) The North and South boundaries are inaccurate 6. Waste water and grey water The provision of water disposal is not adequately set out in the proposal and there are no details regarding the maintenance of the storage system The applicant has designed open areas including ponds, play areas and allotments. The Parish Council believes the ponds are a significant safety risk and

Page 18

maintenance of the ponds and playgrounds is not detailed in the proposal. The applicant states a grey water run off pipe will be required to cross London Road and access the River Cam by cutting through the village Common which is owned by Newport as common land Requirement The applicant must agree, in advance, with the Parish Council its proposal for destruction of Newport's Village Common to include:

• Financial compensation for the use of village land.

• An enforceable agreement for making good the damage caused to Newport's Village Common.

• Provision of improvements to the River Cam to prevent additional flooding caused by increased water to the satisfaction of the Environment Agency.

• Clarify who is responsible for ongoing maintenance and repairs of drain across the Common

7. Maintenance of the site The Parish Council wish to make it clear from the outset that they will not be responsible for any maintenance of the roads or ponds within the development. The applicant must be responsible for all maintenance including the gritting of roads in winter. Requirement The applicant is required to set out the maintenance agreement in detail, including how the residents will fund the work and importantly how often the maintenance will be undertaken. 8. Sewage and foul water The sewage system in Newport is currently inadequate and overloaded; Anglia Water is fully aware of this. The detail within the scheme in respect to sewage and the impact on Newport is not adequate. Requirement The applicant must provide detail on how the holding tank would work and how this would not overload the village sewage system. The applicant must provide details to explain how the flow of sewage will not cause detriment to Newport residents as a direct result of the proposal. 9. Access to London Road The proposal increases one road and two parking accesses to a stretch of London Road within SOMs of an existing crossroads, This is not safe for vehicles or pedestrians and there is no proposal for a pedestrian crossing off London Road for new residents. Requirement The east side of the proposal should be redesigned and a new scheme be agreed to:

• Include a pedestrian crossing on London Road

• Move the main access further from the Frambury Lane junction

• Change access to the site to a roundabout

• Include safe pedestrian crossing off access road from west side of London Road

10. Surface Water Flooding It is not clear from the information provided in this application how the surface water generated within this site will be managed. We perceive three risks if this surface water is improperly managed:

Page 19

1. In extended periods of heavy rain the section of road at the bottom of this

site (London Road) is currently at risk of flooding. The water flows from the ditch on the south side and runs through the garden of Lavender Cottage and overflows onto London Road. The entrance road to the new site would in effect at least double the flow of water and the additional water will only exacerbate this problem.

2. The village common beyond the houses immediately opposite the site

entrance flood routinely in heavy rain when the river below breaks its banks (which in recent years numbers more than five events per annum). The plan for the application requires a drain leading across this Common to the river to provide drainage. How is the impact of this additional flow going to be mitigated? To date, the floods have only breached the gardens on the East of London Road, there is potential that the significant additional water from this site may make the flooding worse.

3. In addition to the impact of flooding on surrounding houses and to the traffic

through the village on the B1383,we believe that there may be a potential risk associated with the proximity of the petrol station to the London Road entry to the site.

Underground Storage Tank (UST) systems can become submerged or displaced by flood waters or extended periods of heavy rain, leading to damaged UST systems or even releases of product. 11. Road and Pedestrian safety within site The proposal only uses traffic tables in certain site areas but does not include further traffic calming. Additionally, the site has not included a "safe drop zone" for our Primary School. Requirement The applicant increases the number of traffic tables on the road system. Further, that the scheme is redesigned on the west side to include:

• Safe drop zone for the School.

• Pedestrian crossing to manage safety issues created by parking spaces 59-64.

12. Addition of new school access The addition of a new school access to the south east corner of corner site is impractical to the existing school access. There is no detail on how to get to the school access and as such is insufficient to determine and guarantee safe access to the school. Requirement The footpath and access point to the south east corner is set out in detail to meet the safety and child welfare requirements of the Newport Primary School governors. The applicant is required to set out in detail the proposed footpath to bridle path such that:

• The pathway is protected from vehicles by use of a short fence

• The pathway is further protected by the use of non slip surfaces that are also DDA compliant

• The applicant provides the Primary School with fences to the south boundary as agreed by school governors to provide security for the school's pupils.

13. Access to Recreation Ground The access to Newport Recreation Ground and provision of safe access to

Page 20

sporting and recreational facilities is inadequate as proposed. The applicant's provision of sporting facilities is not specified in detail and the applicant has not yet consulted directly with the village Sports Committee. Requirement The applicant must provide access points to be agreed with the Parish Council. Additionally the applicant must agree with the Parish Council and set out in detail in its proposals how the monies due from this proposal will be provided to Newport Parish Council and how this will be used. 14. Fences The fences to east boundary of the Newport Recreation Ground have not been needed to prevent balls entering gardens as none currently exist. The boundary is significantly higher (in excess of 10ft) of the proposed gardens to units 33-41(green square on map submission Requirement The applicant provides a 3 Metre wire fence to the east recreation ground boundary together with detail of the space between units 33-41 and the boundary. 15. Commercial Building We are unable to comment on the commercial building as there is insufficient information on this. If large vehicles should need to deliver or collect from this building how these would be accommodated? Policy GEN4 may apply which states that development and uses, whether they involve the installation of plant or machinery or not, will not be permitted where: Uttlesford Local Plan-Adopted January 2005 15 a) noise or vibrations generated, or b) smell, dust, light, fumes, electromagnetic radiation, exposure to other pollutants; would cause material disturbance or nuisance to occupiers of surrounding properties 16. Overlooking of bungalows in Frambury Lane Modifications should be made to No. 88 and 89 on the proposal. Permission was given for a residential annexe (not a shed as shown on the drawing) at "Appleby" in Frambury Lane some years ago and this abuts the boundary and has windows facing south. The neighbouring property "Viola" is 5.2m from the boundary. GEN2i states Design Development will not be permitted unless it would not have a materially adverse effect on the reasonable occupation and enjoyment of a residential or other sensitive property, as a result of loss of privacy, loss of daylight, overbearing impact or overshadowing. 17. Japanese Knotweed It was pointed out by an Ecological Consultant at ECC in March 2016 that there is a possibility of Japanese Knotweed on the site and the applicant would need to investigate this before a planning application could be approved. This plant would cause significant problems and as the land is currently agricultural the owner has an obligation to report and remove it. Requirement That the applicant provides a full report on the investigations carried out.

8. CONSULTATIONS ECC Archaeology 8.1 The Historic Environment Record and the Historic Environment Characterisation

study indicate that the proposed development lies within a potentially sensitive area of heritage assets. The archaeological elements within the Heritage

Page 21

Statement are poor and indicate the specialists have failed to undertaken enough research. Although this contains references to the known records directly affecting the site they have failed to assess the other sites in the immediate vicinity which puts the sites potential in context. The proposed development lies just outside the suggested limits of the medieval town. The Historic Environment Record records a major Roman cemetery and settlement lying to the south east and a probable medieval moated site to the immediate south. The presence of both prehistoric worked cores and waste flakes within the development area indicates flint processing taking place on the site which increases its sensitivity. The above evidence indicates that this development area has a higher significance for the potential of historic environment assets surviving on the site than the applicants have indicated. A full programme of archaeological investigation will be required in advance of any development of this application site. No objections subject to conditions requiring a programme of trail trenching followed by Open Area Excavation.

ECC SUDs 8.2 Letter of 28 July 2015

Object to the granting of planning permission based on the following:

• Lack of information relating to calculation of attenuation volumes. The FRA explains at 9.3 how the attenuation volumes are calculated but does not provide the results. The volumes required to be stored should then be clearly marked on the drainage layout plan. The drainage layout plan should also demonstrate how the proposed drainage features link together.

• Lack of information regarding performance under range of rainfall events. Modelling results using MicroDrainage or similar should be provided to show that the proposed surface water drainage strategy will be able to cope under a range of return periods and storm durations.

• Lack of information relating to exceedance flow paths. An explanation as to the routing of surface water in an event exceeding the 1 in 100 plus climate change should be provided.

We also have the following advisory comments:

• 5.8- We would expect on-site compensation to be provided for loss of natural depressions that may store off-site water, therefore the attenuation features should allow some freeboard for this, otherwise this may be a point for objection.

• Groundwater monitoring data and infiltration test results will be required at the detailed stage to ensure the drainage hierarchy has been followed and that the proposed surface water drainage strategy would not experience groundwater influx.

Letter dated 6 April 2016 Having reviewed the Flood Risk Assessment and the associated documents which accompanied the planning application, we support the granting of planning permission subject to conditions.

8.3 ECC Education It is anticipated that this proposed development would generate a requirement for

up to 10 early years and childcare places, 28 primary and 19 secondary school

Page 22

places. According to the latest information available to Essex County Council, early years and childcare provisions in the Newport Ward are limited as there is only one day care provider. The neighbouring ward of Chesterford is operating at over 80°/o capacity, with limited vacancies. It is thereby clear that additional provisions would be needed to support this proposed development. This proposed development is located within the priority admissions area for Newport Primary School. The school has a capacity of 172 places. The school is forecast to have a deficit of 11 places by the school year 2018-19. A contribution for additional primary school places should, therefore, be requested. This proposed development is located within the Uttlesford secondary group 3 (Newport/ Saffron Walden) forecast planning group. The forecast planning group has an overall capacity of 3,002 places. The Uttlesford secondary group 3 forecast planning group is forecast to have a deficit of 112 places by the school year 2018-19.A contribution f or additional secondary school places should, therefore, be requested. Having reviewed the proximity of the site to the nearest primary and secondary schools, we will not be seeking a school transport contribution. • In view of the above I request on behalf of Essex County Council that any permission for this development is granted subject to a section 106 agreement to mitigate its impact on education. The formula for calculating education contributions is outlined in our Developers' Guide to Infrastructure Contributions, 2010 Edition. Our standard s106 agreement clauses that give effect to this formula are stated in our Education Contributions Supplement, published in July 2010. For information purposes only, should the final development result in the suggested net increase, the following contributions would be payable; The early years and childcare contribution would be £125,093.94. The primary school contribution for the expansion of Newport Primary School would be £343,250.00. The secondary school contribution f or the expansion of the Joyce Frankland Academy would be £347,631.00. If your council were minded to turn down the application, I would be grateful if the lack of education provision in the area can be noted as an additional reason for refusal and that we are automatically consulted on any appeal or further application relating to the site.

8.4 ECC Ecology Letter dated 16 October 2015:

Objection due to insufficient information on legally protected species. Ecology report identifies the potential for Japanese Knotweed on the site. Further information is required to determine whether the plant is Japanese knotweed, and to inform any mitigation prior to determination. Given the destructive nature of the plant and its ability to spread and cause damage to buildings, it is not sufficient to state that a survey should be undertaken prior to commencement on site. The Report also identifies the presence of Badgers but no information is provided

Page 23

detailing the level of activity or how this needs to inform the layout. Re-consultation 29 June 2016

My original objection (October 2015) identified a lack of ecological information; specifically on Japanese knotweed and badgers. These reports have now been produced and all relevant site plans updated. The following documents are referred to throughout this response: • Japanese knotweed (25th May 2016) • Badger (28th June 2016) • Design and Access Statement • Revised -Proposed Site Plan (301/01/00 I) Japanese knotweed The Japanese knotweed report identifies presence of this plant (legally protected under schedule 9 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act) on site and measures to eradicate it. The law prevents this plant from being spread in the wild, and as such, the landowner has a legal duty to eradicate it prior to commencement of work on site. Eradication of Japanese knotweed should be secured through condition. Badgers Although some data were collected demonstrating badgers were using the development site (including tracks and some photographs), the level of activity was very low. The majority of foraging and dispersal appears to occur south of the site in an area of existing woodland. Given this information, it is considered highly unlikely that implementing the development will significantly alter their ability to survive or reproduce. The applicant has altered the scheme design and it should not require a license from Natural England. The applicant has also included a wildlife area in the south western comer to mitigate for any minor loss of foraging habitat. This is welcomed. One concern is the location of the allotments in the SW comer of the site; as badgers may well try and dig in. It is strongly recommended that this area is proofed with an underground mesh and appropriate badger proof fencing to prevent this happening. Uttlesford District Council should also ensure the area of woodland off site to the south is not affected by future development. In addition to the above, all impact avoidance measures in Section 5.2 should be adhered to; this includes ensuring badgers can freely move along the southern boundary. An updated badger survey should be undertaken if the development has not commenced by June 2017. This should be conditioned. Open Space Design The Design and Access Statement includes two ponds which will be surrounded by wildflower grassland and tree planting. There is currently no detail on how these ponds and wildlife areas should be designed, implemented and managed to benefit wildlife. A biodiversity enhancement and management plan should be provided for all open spaces. This should be a collaborative effort between the landscape architect and ecologist to ensure maximum biodiversity gain. This should be conditioned.

Page 24

8.5 ECC Highways

Letter dated 31 March 2016

Recommend Refuse The application fails to provide adequate information to demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Highway Authority that the impact on the highway network is acceptable in terms of highway safety, accessibility, layout and parking provision. Specifically the following matters have not been adequately addressed 1. Access 1.1. A safe and suitable access has not been demonstrated. A design of the proposed access, which includes details of the relocation of the existing pedestrian crossing and island, visibility splays, junction radii, levels and the highway boundary, is required. 1.2. The access design for the development should be accompanied by a Stage 1 Safety Audit which has been carried out by a suitably qualified independent auditor who has been provided with the necessary traffic flow, speed and accident data. A designer’s response to any issues should also be provided 1.3. There is a marked height difference between London Road and the site. Details should be provided to show that the appropriate gradient for all accesses can be achieved. 2. Layout 2.1. The proposed road layout, as shown on drawing number 301/01/011 S, shows a one way, shared used road that serves approximately half the development. The design of this road, including its width, is likely to lead to inappropriate speeds to the detriment highway safety. 3. Parking 3.1. The parking provision does not conform to the Essex Parking Standards, Design and Good Practice (2009). The application does not provide sufficient parking provision for the commercial aspects of the development and the proposal to use the residential visitor parking for the commercial development is likely to lead to conflict, inappropriate and potentially unsafe parking within the development. 3.2. As far as can be determined from the submitted plans, there is a discrepancy between drawing number 301/01/011 S and the text in the application. The proposed site layout shows residential parking spaces with dimensions that are smaller than those stated in the text and then those required by the Essex Parking Standards. 3.3. The secure, cycle parking provision is remote from the dwellings it serves and unlikely to be used as intended. 4. Bridleway 41 (Newport) 4.1. No evidence is contained within the application to show that the applicant enjoys a private right of way for vehicles over the bridleway 41 (Newport) or has control over sufficient land to provide safe access to the carpark for vehicular traffic whilst maintaining safe access for existing users, therefore it has not been demonstrated that this aspect of the application can be delivered. The proposal is therefore contrary to policies DM1, DM6, DM8, DM11 and DM14 contained within the County Highway Authority’s Development Management Policies, adopted as County Council Supplementary Guidance in February 2011.

Page 25

Letter dated 24 August 2016 The assessment of the application and transport assessment was undertaken with reference to the National Planning Policy Framework and in particular paragraph 32, the following was considered: access and safety; capacity; the opportunities for sustainable transport; and mitigation measures. This application has been reviewed by the highway authority a number of times and has undergone a number of revisions of the access arrangements in order to get it to the point where it is acceptable to the highway authority. Likewise the layout and parking arrangements have been revised a number of times. The layout is unsuitable for adoption by the highway authority and the applicant has stated in their transport assessment that they do not expect it to be adopted. Although the parking aspects of the application are for the Planning Authority to take a view on, the highway authority has reviewed these in regard to likely impact on the highway. The residential aspects of the parking are acceptable however, the commercial parking provision falls short of the maximum requirements in the Essex Parking Standards, the view of the highway authority is that this is unlikely to adversely impact on the existing highway. The management of parking within the development will be the developer’s responsibility as the roads will remain unadopted. Car park and access arrangements The application shows a carpark adjacent to the school accessed by bridleway 16 (Newport) and in the transport assessment outlines the intention to improve the PROW with resurfacing. No evidence is contained within the application to show that the applicant enjoys a private right of way for vehicles over the bridleway 16 (Newport) or has control over sufficient land to provide safe access to the carpark for vehicular traffic whilst maintaining safe access for existing users. Any works to the public right of way 16 (Newport) are likely to subject to a separate consultation process. The highway authority would not want this part of the application to be implemented until either vehicular access rights over the PROW have been obtained or an alternative access to the carpark has been provided. Highway Land The development encroaches on to a slither of land, over which there are highway rights, adjacent to London Road. Plots 3, 4, 5 and 6 and associated parking are partially situated on this land. No part of the development situated on the highway should be commenced unless or until highway rights have been removed. I would suggest that the developer applies to the Highway Authority for removal of highway rights from the land in question, however there may be highway requirements to consider if an application was made in this regard and the granting of it is not guaranteed. Excepting the two issues above from a highway and transportation perspective the impact of the proposal is acceptable to the Highway Authority subject to conditions.

Page 26

8.6 ECC Police Essex Police do not object to this application in principle but would seek a

condition if the application is permitted. The Design & Access statement makes two references to Secured by Design; LAYOUT The homes are all located around 2 central open spaces, with back gardens generally backing on to the perimeter of the site. This provides each home with a garden that is secure and private, in line with Secure by Design recommendations. It also ensures nearly all kitchens and bedrooms have views over the public open spaces and play areas, which improves natural surveillance and enhances a sense of community. SECURED BY DESIGN All gardens have been placed back to back with other gardens leaving the homes themselves to provide security and surveillance of the street-scape and front gardens. All kitchen windows look out over the village green, allowing parents to keep an eye out for children playing in the communal shared public open space. A good percentage of parking is on-plot, and there is clear demarcation of private and public realm making it clear when intruders are moving onto private property. All ground floor doors and windows will meet the Secured by Design security and lock standards. All footpaths will be illuminated with LED lighting at night, and the school access footpath will be closed with gates at night. No planting will provide cover for intruders, and the street layout optimises the potential for resident surveillance with a limited number of well-lit entrances to the new development. Essex Police supports the developer’s intention of including windows, doors and layout to SBD standards; We would just seek the condition that the development achieves full SBD certification. There appears to be a willingness for this to be achieved. SBD supports the council’s responsibilities under Sec17 Crime and disorder act. Its desire to reduce carbon outputs and crime has its own carbon footprint. Reduce opportunities for crime and the need for emergency services and maintenance works is reduced along with their carbon footprints. SBD is a long established successful crime prevention initiative with proven results of preventing and reducing opportunities for crime and anti-social behaviour. Further to this you cannot have a sustainable development/community if crime is a problem. Essex Police architectural liaison service will work with the developer to aid their certification process.

8.7 Anglian Water Our records show that there are no assets owned by Anglian Water or those

subject to an adoption agreement within the development site boundary. Section 2 – Wastewater Treatment 2.1 The foul drainage from this development is in the catchment of Newport Water Recycling Centre, which currently does not have capacity to treat the flows from your development site. Anglian Water are obligated to accept the foul flows from development with the benefit of planning consent and

Page 27

would therefore take the necessary steps to ensure that there is sufficient treatment capacity should the planning authority grant planning permission. Section 3 – Foul Sewerage Network 3.1 Development will lead to an unacceptable risk of flooding downstream. However a development impact assessment has been prepared in consultation with Anglian Water to a feasible mitigation solution. We will request a condition requiring compliance with the agreed drainage strategy. We request that the agreed strategy is reflected in the planning approval. Section 4 – Surface Water Disposal 4.1 From the details submitted to support the planning application the proposed method of surface water management does not relate to Anglian Water operated assets. As such, we are unable to provide comments on the suitability of the surface water management. The Local Planning Authority should seek the advice of the Lead Local Flood Authority or the Internal Drainage Board. The Environment Agency should be consulted if the drainage system directly or indirectly involves the discharge of water into a watercourse. 4.2 Should the proposed method of surface water management change to include interaction with Anglian Water operated assets, we would wish to be re-consulted to ensure that an effective surface water drainage strategy is prepared and implemented. Section 5 – Trade Effluent 5.1 The planning application includes employment/commercial use. To discharge trade effluent from trade premises to a public sewer vested in Anglian Water requires our consent. It is an offence under section 118 of the Water Industry Act 1991 to discharge trade effluent to sewer without consent. Anglian Water would ask that an advisory note be included within your Notice should permission be granted.

8.8 Environment Agency

Letter 26 February 2016

Requested further information.

8.9 BAA The proposed development is located approximately 10.5km North of Stansted

Airport. It has been examined from an aerodrome safeguarding aspect and could conflict with safeguarding criteria unless any planning permission granted is subject to conditions. The proposed wetland habitat associated with the two proposed SUDS ponds has the potential to attract and support breeding feral geese (Canada and Greylag Geese). It is important to ensure that feral geese are dissuaded from using the SUDs. There may be a further requirement to implement a bird hazard management plan for this development. This will depend on the final design of the SUDs schemes and landscaping proposed. In order to cover that potential requirement a condition should also be applied.

Page 28

8.10 NHS The proposal comprises a residential development of 94 dwellings, which is likely

to have an impact of the NHS funding programme for the delivery of primary healthcare provision within this area and specifically within the health catchment of the development. NHSE would therefore expect these impacts to be fully assessed and mitigated by way of a developer contribution secured through a Section 106 planning obligation. The planning application does not include a Healthcare Impact Assessment (HIA) of the proposed development. However it is noted that reference to the need for a developer contribution to mitigation of the healthcare impacts arising from the proposed development is included in the Planning Statement accompanying this application. 4NHSE have recently carried out a review of GP services to identify capacity issues throughout Essex. This development is likely to have an impact on the services of 1 GP practice within Newport. This GP practices does not have capacity for the additional growth as a result of this development. Therefore a HIA has been prepared by NHSE to provide the basis for a developer contribution towards capital funding to increase capacity within the GP Catchment Area. There is a capacity deficit in the catchment practice and a developer contribution of £32,220 is required to mitigate the ‘capital cost’ to NHSE for the provision of additional healthcare services arising directly as a result of the development proposal. NHSE, therefore requests that this sum be secured through a planning obligation linked to any grant of planning permission, in the form of a Section 106 Agreement

8.11 Highways Agency No Objections 8.12 Sport England Whilst the proposed development may not have any direct physical impact on the

adjacent cricket pitch, consideration should be given to how the proposed residential development may be affected by cricket use. English Cricket Board (ECB) Guidance sets out a minimum suggested boundary of 45.72m (50 yards) for senior cricket, measured from the middle stump of the wicket in use. However cricket balls will travel further than the minimum suggested boundary. To avoid future conflict between the cricket club and the proposed housing, such as potential personal injury and damage to property, consideration should be given to the need for ball stop protective netting or other appropriate measures which would prevent balls entering the proposed development. The ECB and Sport England recommends that a Cricket Boundary Risk Assessment is undertaken, by a competent person, in order to assess the potential risk of cricket balls being hit into the proposed housing development from the adjacent to the Recreation Ground. This Risk Assessment should review the distances from the cricket wickets to the proposed development to ascertain the risk of balls landing in the adjacent housing. The Risk Assessment will then

Page 29

be able to confirm the risk to the proposed housing development and the protective measures which are necessary to reduce that risk. This being the case, Sport England does not wish to raise an objection to this application, subject to a condition being attached to the decision notice.

Re-consultation Response 2 March 2016: No further comments to make in relation

to the further information/amendments proposed. Reiterate the requirement for the condition requiring a Cricket Boundary Risk Assessment to be submitted and approved to ensure the use of the adjacent cricket pitch is not prejudiced by the proposal.

8.13 Network Rail No objections 8.14 UDC Environmental Health This site is subject to environmental noise from the M11, the B1383 London Road,

and Newport Primary School. Environmental Health advised the applicant that the average noise level in living rooms in the daytime should not exceed 35dB LAeq,16hr and in bedrooms at night should not exceed 30dB LAeq, 8hr. The maximum instantaneous noise level in bedrooms should not exceed 5dB LAmax,fast The target for external amenity areas should be 50 dB LAeq,16hr if achievable, but 55dB LAeq,16hr might be acceptable in some areas of the development. These values are based on the WHO Guidelines for Community Noise and BS:8233:2014. The applicant was advised to submit a noise report to demonstrate that these noise levels are achievable, with provision for ventilation. A noise impact assessment has been submitted which relates measured noise levels to BS8233:2014. Internal noise levels The noise assessment shows that without additional mitigation, acceptable average internal noise levels would not be achieved in units 1-6 day or night, even when the windows are closed. Calculations show that the properties nearest London Road would be expected to suffer noise exceeding 49 dB ten times during the night with the windows closed. Internal noise levels on the rest of the site would be acceptable if the windows were kept closed. If windows were opened nearly all the properties would exceed the noise limit at night, typically by 6-10 dB, but by around 20dB for units 1-6. In the daytime with the windows open exceedances would be small on much of the site, but 22dB for units 1-6 and 8dB for units 7- 12 and 91-94. This noise environment is shared by existing properties fronting London Road. Mitigation has been proposed which depends on keeping windows closed and providing alternative means of ventilation. The plans have been revised since the noise survey was carried out. The night time calculations for units 1 and 2 were done at first floor level, but these units are now designated as ground floor flats. Similarly, for units 3-6 the night time noise was calculated at ground floor level, but these units now have first floor bedrooms. These calculations will need to be revised accordingly. Further calculations would be required to show how far into the development maximum night noise would exceed 45dB. External noise levels The noise assessment indicates average daytime noise levels in external amenity

Page 30

areas would exceed 50dB, and in about half of the private gardens would exceed the upper target of 55dB. Noise levels between 50-55dB should be minimised and mitigated as far as possible, but levels above 55dB in private gardens would have significant adverse effects and should be avoided. School noise The noise level at plots nearest the school increased by 9.4 dB at lunch time compared to times the children are in class. This is defined as a substantial impact, and mitigation will be required to avoid significant adverse effects at affected properties. Mitigation The report proposes glazing specifications for units 1-6 which would offer additional noise insulation and bring down the internal noise levels to an acceptable level, provided the windows are kept closed. Acoustic trickle vents and mechanical or passive extract ventilation are proposed to provide ventilation to properties where windows would have to be kept closed to avoid significant adverse effects. This would apply to bedrooms throughout the site and living rooms of units 1-12 and 91-94. Living rooms of many other units would exceed the daytime average noise target by less than 5 dB. This would still result in an observed adverse effect which should be mitigated and reduced to a minimum by the provision of alternative means of ventilation here too. With respect to garden areas, the report concludes that screening from motorway noise would not be practical. Revised plans have removed the three properties nearest the motorway. Fencing may be able to reduce the impact of noise from the school and from London Road. Further details of how the adverse impacts of noise on garden areas will be mitigated and minimised and levels above 55dB avoided are required. Further information required 1. Details of the glazing specification required to meet the internal noise targets including Lmax, taking account of the revised plans for units 1-6. 2. Calculations to show which properties would be subject to excessive maximum noise levels at night, and how this will be mitigated. 3. A scheme of ventilation proposals for all properties where internal noise targets can only be met by keeping the windows closed. 4. Proposals to mitigate against the impact of school noise at affected properties. 5. Details of how the adverse impacts of average daytime noise levels above 50dB in garden areas will be mitigated and minimised, and levels above 55dB avoided.

8.15 UDC Housing Enabling Officer The mix as shown on page 22 of the Design and Access Statement is acceptable

although it looks as though there is a cluster of 11 in the top left hand corner of the site. I note there are 2x2 bed bungalows for the affordable and 3x2 bungalows for open market. This meets the Council's policy Housing Associations require roads to be adopted or it adds costs to themselves. The fact that the road is not to be adopted is a concern, especially as households accessing affordable rent have limited choices when accepting a property.

8.16 UDC Access and Equalities Officer There is a commitment within the Design and Access Statement to comply with the

SPD on Accessible Homes and Playspace. However, I have some general concerns as follows across the site;

Page 31

1. The topography of the site would indicate that level access into the principal entrances may not be achieved on every dwelling. Please ask the developer if this is the case of how they are going to address this. 2. There is a reference to ‘Home Zone’ shared surfaces, is there a policy on this as some groups with visual impairments and children playing find that there are issues with no delineation between cars and pedestrians. Your comments would be appreciated. 3. I need confirmation of the layout of the WC as there does not appear to be the current 1100mm clearance that we look for in front of the WC bowl on those properties of three bedrooms or more. There is also a house type that shows in inward opening door on the WC, due to the proximity to the principal entrance, for Part M of the Building regulations an outward opening door is a requirement. There is no location shown for through floor lift provision either. 4. I also need confirmation that the entrances will be illuminated and have a covered main entrance. 5. It is also confirmed within the Design and Access Statement that there will be 5% of dwellings designed to meet the Wheelchair Accessible Housing Standard. Please advise which plots this will relate to and confirm that the layout will meet the standard. The proximity of the garage and the dwelling is important to provide good cover at the point of transfer from the vehicle to the wheelchair. The glazing line is also important in those dwellings.

9. REPRESENTATIONS 9.1 1 letter of support and 67 letters objecting to the application have been received.

Support is on the basis that there is a need for affordable housing in Newport so that existing residents can stay in the village. The letters of objection raise the following:

• Development is located outside village limits

• Development is contrary to the Local Plan Policies S3, S7, GEN1 (c), GEN2, GEN3, GEN8, ENV5, H9, H11.

• Contrary to the NPPF

• Contrary to the Newport Village Plan 2010

• No provision for elderly and infirm for shops and services

• Demand for affordable housing – anything over 3 bedroom is not affordable

• Roads, drainage/sewerage is insufficient to accommodate extra housing. Existing systems overflow in heavy storms

• The sewage plant is already overloaded and smells in the summer months.

• The flooding of Newport common is becoming heavier and proper infrastructure and drainage plans would need to be put in place to ensure there is no increase in run off from the site.

• Roads, notably Frambury Road are congested and used for parking for the railway.

• Loss of countryside

• Loss of good quality agricultural land

• Land within the Green Belt

• Loss of amenity from annexe windows that look over the application site through overlooking and loss light.

• Not sustainable development within Newport

• Newport High Street cannot cope with 200 extra vehicles as it is congested now at peak times.

• A new entrance onto the main road so close to the turning into Frambury Lane will cause a danger on to the main highway.

Page 32

• The trees on boundary with Larks have multiple TPO’s and will influence the development

• The “eco” title doesn’t actually mean anything worthwhile. Doubt that these properties achieve A rating and be constructed with “eco” materials.

• Development is too large for the village

• Parking on site is inadequate for the number of vehicles likely to be used which will result in parking on the estate or main road

• Surely there are other more suitable areas in the Uttlesford area that has the space to accommodate these additional houses. We have already seen the size of our village increase and soon will be a town

• on a slightly smaller scale with less impact to neighbouring properties this could be one of the better development suggestions, as we do need to accept the need for more housing across the country (UK) however in order to address that need for more housing, the services and amenities and core infrastructure must be in place to support developments.

• The area is buckling under the weight of development

• The current proposal will contrast too starkly with Newport village due to the homogenous design signature; the architectural design is better suited to a ‘New Town’.

• A greater degree of separation of this new ‘eco village’ and the existing village is required so that proposals are set further back from London Road.

• Proposals are over development of the village and totally inappropriate for a rural setting. Long terraces of houses and mix of one two and three storey properties is out of keeping. Terraces should be broken up, styles mixed and material should more in keeping.

• Particular concerns for own neighbourhood where the river has come very close to bursting its banks in recent years and we are further downstream from this development.

• Plans are inadequate to deal with surface water

• Tanks will only collect from half of the site

• The school would be ill-advised to accept responsibility for a public car park.

• A back gate on to school land is proposed, but there is no vehicle drop off point. This will lead cars to park near the gate (to avoid the congestion at the main school entrance and on Frambury Lane), and will create further problems.

• The ponds pose an extreme hazard for young children and should be removed from the site.

• The Councils SHLAA and draft Local Plan have been deemed unsound against Regulations and Planning Law and have been withdrawn, the draft local plan cannot be considered as emerging, as such, determination of this application should not be informed by the abandoned draft Local Plan and SHLAA.

• Does not provide 100% affordable housing as required by policy H11.

• Proposed 20% affordable housing is only 50% of the Local Plan requirement.

• Close proximity of the entrance to the proposed housing estate to a pedestrian crossing place

• Added danger to pupils walking to school.

• The site should be used to provide retail development

• Request that new house boundaries are removed from gardens of existing properties by 2 or 3 metres.

• High dwellings will block out light to properties on Frambury Lane

Page 33

• Location of play space and shared space with school in relation to car parking spaces.

• UDC has a five year supply of housing and therefore does not need this development

• The development should provide funding for an all-weather multi use area

• Car park for school should be shared with sports facilities

• Issue of ownership along London Road. The application incorporates highway land.

• Location of access on London Road and its proximity to other junctions.

• Concern on impact on amenities on properties on London Road which are at a considerably lower level than the development.

• The Hyder report commissioned by UDC in 2009 confirmed that sewage and water disposal infrastructure was beyond capacity.

• Objection to the use of a ditch and culvert running under Lavender Cottage and under London Road.

• The Health Impact Assessment is inadequate

• The scheme as designed with no vehicular access to the primary school and Frambury Lane from the application site could undermine further development to the west. It is important that proposals brought forward in advance of an adopted Local Plan do not prejudice the Council’s ability to consider other developments in the area.

• The Newport Sports Committee considers that a contribution of £478,603 should be sought towards additional sporting facilities in line with the Council’s Uttlesford Open Space, Sport Facility and Playing Pitch Strategy, document of January 2012.

• Initial discussions with the developer referred to the provision of a Multi Use Games Area (MUGA) on the land between the Recreation Ground and the primary school. There is no reference to this in the plans or reports.

Following receipt of amended plans a further 17 letters of objection have been received. Most reiterate their previous concerns that are recorded above and also continue to raise concerns about the accuracy of the plans and reports and that the application still does not address drainage and flooding adequately. Newport Primary School has also commented on the application. Letter dated 31 July 2016 They land to be gifted to the school should not offset the S106 contributions. It was understood that an area of 0.8ha should be given to the school to support future expansion as the village grows. The land attached is less than this (0.36ha) and the reduced amount may compromise the future expansion of the school. The area to be shared with the school would not be used because it is not within the school grounds and would risk falling into repair quite quickly. This area should be moved west so that it adjoins school grounds. It is unclear how the community Land Trust would work. The pedestrian gate should be for maintenance vehicles which would give better access to the school field than at present and would reduce traffic along the lane. The access to the proposed school car park is unsafe and unusable if the lane remains the lane. Would wish the car park to be gated and for sole use of the school. The land should be a wide two-way road with footpath and would allow the car park to be a drop off point. The new land should be totally enclosed. Taller fencing along the northern and eastern sides of the school grounds should be incorporated to improve pupil security and reduce risk of loss of balls.

Page 34

Letter dated 15 October 2015 The school sought to clarify its position: The officer of a gift of land contiguous with the school that would have a car park and woodland is very welcome. The existing car park would become an obvious place to expand in to in the future. The area shown as ‘Area shared with School’ is not in any way owned by the school and the school can make arrangements to use it if required. It is not therefore the school’s concern. Letter dated 17 March 2016 Comments on the revised design submitted February 2016. Security We note that the proposed path between the SE corner and the car park remains on the plan. We have seated before that pedestrian access to the recreation ground through the proposed gifted land is impractical and insecure. We have also asked for secure fencing all the way around the newly proposed outline of the school grounds yet there is no fence indicated on the Southern or Northern edges of the proposed gift. Landscaping We asked for dense planting to the southern perimeter of the school field to screen the school where it abuts the proposed development. This is to ensure pupil privacy and create a natural break between the development and the school. Hard and soft landscaping alongside all boundary treatments also need to be considered within the District Council's conditions. Access We are pleased to see that there are "Double Gates to Gifted School Land" on the plan with a road towards the school field. There appear to be gates at the end of that road which suggests that the proposed gift will remain behind a fence and hard to use. As with Security (above) we would like the whole of the newly proposed school plot enclosed with a new fence and the existing fence removed to make the proposed gift properly contiguous with the existing land. Car Park We remain concerned that the car park would be unsafe and unusable if members of staff have to walk down the lane to the school. We have suggested that there is a lockable pedestrian gate between the car park and the school but this does not appear on the plan. We have seen the Sports Committee's suggestion that the car park be extended in to the recreation ground and believe that has merit, as long as there is a gate in to the school grounds. MUGA The Sports committee's suggestion of the provision of a Multi-Use Games Area (MUGA) below the new school car park is fully supported by the Primary School as having obvious benefits for the school and the local community. We expect Uttlesford District Council to secure these elements when considering the application as part and parcel of the permission, if permission is granted.

Four letters from Councillor Hargreaves raise the following points; Letter received 19 August 2015

Page 35

• concerns regarding discrepancies within the submitted documents and plans

• Contrary to NPPF and Policy S3, S7, GEN1(c), GEN2: (i), GEN3, H9.

• Proposal is on greenfield land, currently a productive arable field.

• The site is outside the 2005 Plan village development boundary and so should not be allowed.

• Uttlesford currently has a 5.4 year housing land supply.

• It is not clear that the minimum parking standards have been achieved. The full standards need to be applied in this location.

• Significant development to the south of Newport is potentially unviable because of the cost of a larger sewer and pumping station to the works which are to the north of the village.

• The development will result in a 10% increase in the size of the village and the largest development proposal for 40 years.

• The access to the site on London Road is very close to the Frambury Lane turn.

• No vehicle drop off point adjacent to the school.

• 3 storey houses backing on to the bungalows on Frambury Lane.

• The submitted FRA is inadequate and does not provide a designed drainage solution.

• Only approx. 20% of the housing is proposed as affordable.

• Contribution should be provided towards the provision of a MUGA.

Letter received 15 October 2015

• Continuing concerns regarding accuracy of plans and reports

• Plots 1 - 6 have direct access onto London Rd and will contribute to congestion.

• The access road should be moved south

• Houses 2- 6 are built on a swale

• The proposed access onto recreation ground has not been agreed with the Sports Committee.

• Details should be submitted of the onsite foul water holding tank and release system.

• Anglian Water have not commented on the application

• Clarification sought on whether AW will adopt the rainwater suds system.

• Queries the provision of a new flood sewer into the River Cam and the flood pipe through the Common.

Letter received 10 March 2016

• A number of the previous comments remain unanswered relating to foul and surface water drainage.

• The access onto the recreation ground is still shown

• The access road has not been moved south

• The existing drainage channel along western boundary of site is not recorded

• The UDC requirement should be £440k for recreation and sport provision.

• Is the land to be gifted and is Essex Educational accepting it in lieu of the required contribution?

• The spec for the new car park should be clarified.

• The site is to the south of the existing bungalows and will clearly reduce

Page 36

light in winter. Bungalows should be moved to be near the existing ones?

Letter received 27 June 2016

• Additional information and amendments still do not address most of the issues raised.

• The sewage solution requires an onsite tank with mechanical release systems and odour control. This should be detailed at this stage.

• Both Highways and the applicant's response about the ownership of the byway by the school are most unhelpful.

• Like the modern design - a C21st house should look like one, not a shrunk to fit pastiche of previous styles

10. APPRAISAL The issues to consider in the determination of the application are: A Principle of Development B Loss of Agricultural Land C Design & Amenity D Highways E Infrastructure Provision to support the development F Ecology & Landscaping G Drainage H Provision of School Land I Other Material Considerations A Whether the Principle is Acceptable 10.1 10.2 10.3 10.4

The application site was originally identified for development in the now withdrawn 2014 Draft Local Plan under Newport Policy 3. That policy allocated the site for 70 dwellings with the requirement that vehicular access should be taken from London Road and development should include the provision of a vehicular access and pedestrian access to the primary school and Frambury Lane, it should provide a LAP and NEAP and should include the provision of 0.8ha additional land for the pre/primary school as part of the education contribution. Following the withdrawal of the draft Local Plan, that policy and the requirements that it set out have no weight and the development of the site needs to be considered and assessed against the current Local Plan and the NPPF. The application site comprises 4.5 hectares of land and is located within the open countryside on the edge of Newport. The site is outside the development limits of Newport as defined by the Proposals Map and is therefore located within the countryside where ULP Policy S7 applies. This specifies that the countryside will be protected for its own sake and planning permission will only be given for development that needs to take place there or is appropriate to a rural area. Development will only be permitted if its appearance protects or enhances the particular character of the part of the countryside within which it is set or there are special reasons why the development in the form proposed needs to be there. The Council’s Review of the adopted policies of the Local Plan found Policy S7 to be partly consistent with the NPPF but that while the NPPF takes a positive approach, rather than a protective, Policy S7 is still compatible with the aims of the

Page 37

10.5 10.6 10.7 10.8 10.9 10.10 10.11 10.12

NPPF in protecting the countryside. A recent Secretary of State appeal decision endorsed this finding and attached significant weight to this. Policy S7 therefore remains relevant to the consideration of this application. Paragraph 49 of the NPPF confirms that housing applications should be considered in the context of the presumption in favour of sustainable development. Relevant policies for the supply of housing should not be considered up-to-date if the local planning authority cannot demonstrate a five-year supply of deliverable housing sites. The Council’s updated Housing Trajectory and 5 Year Land Supply Statement published in November 2015 confirms that the Council is able to demonstrate a 5 year supply of housing land. The Council is required to identify annually a supply of specific deliverable sites sufficient to provide five years’ worth of housing against their housing requirements with an additional buffer of 5% (moved forward from later in the plan period) to ensure choice and competition in the market for land. The Council considers that it is a ‘5% authority’. This was supported by the Local Plan Inspector, by various Inspectors in more recent appeal decisions and by the Secretary of State in the Land Securities Ltd appeal decision in August 2016. The Housing Trajectory and 5 Year Land Supply Statement explains that until the Council has determined its objectively assessed need it considers its housing requirement to be between 568 to 580 dwellings a year. The Council estimates that 3530 dwellings will be delivered over the next 5 years which provides the District with between 5.1 – 5.3 years of supply, depending on the housing target, but including a 5% buffer. The Council can therefore demonstrate a deliverable 5 year supply of housing land. Notwithstanding this fact, applications have to be considered against the guidance set out in Paragraphs 6 - 15 of the NPPF. The Council needs to continue to consider, and where appropriate, approve development which is sustainable and meets its housing objectives. Paragraphs 7 and 14 of the NPPF set out the presumption in favour of sustainable development whilst paragraphs 18 to 219 of the Framework, taken as a whole, constitute the Government’s view of what sustainable development in England means in practice for the planning system. Paragraph 7 of the NPPF sets out the three dimensions of sustainable development as being economic, social and environmental and a key consideration therefore is whether the proposed application satisfies these three roles and can be regarded as sustainable. The NPPF specifically states that these roles should not be undertaken in isolation, because they are mutually dependent. To achieve sustainable development economic, social and environmental gains should be sought jointly and simultaneously. It is therefore necessary to consider these three principles. Economic Role: The NPPF requires that development should contribute to building a strong, responsive and competitive economy by ensuring, amongst other things, that sufficient land of the right type is available in the right places and at the right time to support growth and innovation. The application site is close to facilities within Newport and would bring economic benefits to the settlement of Newport, supporting local services and amenities such as the shops and public houses as a result of the future occupiers of the

Page 38

10.13 10.14 10.15 10.16 10.17 10.18 10.19 10.20 10.21 10.22 10.23

development. In addition the proposal would provide some positive economic contribution during the construction process of the development. The development also contains a commercial building which would fall within a B1, D1 or D2 use and could therefore provide opportunities for employment. The development will also bring growth and innovation with the design of this development. A prototype has been erected at the Building Research Establishment (BRE) in Watford and will provide the same energy, sustainability and construction strategies. Lessons learnt from the BRE house will be incorporated into the design of dwellings the subject of this application. The house is being systematically monitored by BRE and the electricity output and other performance factors continually recorded. The proposed dwellings are to be assessed for the Home Quality Mark standard which has been designed by the BRE to replace the Code for Sustainable Homes. The aim is that the proposed dwellings will be zero carbon and zero bills, providing a positive economic contribution for future occupants. As a result, the development provides a positive economic approach that satisfies the economic dimension of sustainability in the NPPF. Social Role: The NPPF identifies this as supplying required housing and creating high quality built environment with accessible local services that reflect the community’s needs and support its health, social and cultural well-being. The proposal would provide 92 dwellings with ancillary infrastructure and would be capable of providing some of the day to day needs for future occupiers. The development is also located within walking and cycling distance of most of the facilities and services contained in Newport and future residents could rely on the village to provide most of their day to day needs such as health, social and cultural well-being as well as shopping, ensuring and promoting the village as an appropriate mixed and well balanced community. The application site boundary is also approximately 200m from the railway station and close to bus stops providing residents with easy access to facilities outside the village including employment. Although the application site is outside the defined village development limits in planning terms, it is located close to the centre of the village and it allow residents to integrate into the village and village life. The proposal is for an ‘eco village’ and proposes a high quality built environment with open space which includes allotments and growing and biodiversity areas to provide an attractive and inclusive development The proposal would make a contribution towards the delivery of the housing needed for the district, including provision of affordable housing, and housing designed to be both accessible and zero carbon. As a result, the development provides a positive approach that satisfies the social dimension of sustainability in the NPPF Environmental Role: The NPPF identifies this as contributing to protecting and enhancing our natural, built and historic environment, including, inter alia, improvements to biodiversity and minimising waste. The proposal would have some limited impacts but this would be partly offset by

Page 39

10.24 10.25 10.26

the design of the proposal which incorporates measures to safeguard and mitigate and where possible, to enhance the environment in and around the site. These measures include enhancing biodiversity, safeguarding existing boundary trees and hedges and reinforcing planting along the boundaries and providing sustainable drainage systems. The development is also aimed at providing zero carbon homes and is partly being promoted on its environmental credentials. These will provide residents, including those occupying the affordable housing, with the ability to reduce their carbon footprint and to live in homes that will be energy efficient. The development would therefore promote environmental innovation and assist in adapting to climate by moving to a low carbon economy. The location of the development will allow residents to use sustainable transport options such as walking, cycling and public transport which thereby reduces the need and reliance on private cars. The site is within 200m of the railway station and close to bus stops on London Road. The scheme would help to fulfil the three principles of sustainable development. As such the proposals would comply with the positive stance towards sustainable development in this respect as set out in the NPPF and the presumption in favour of approval, unless material considerations indicate otherwise. Significant weight should be attached to this and consider that the more recent national policy set out in the NPPF should take precedence over Policy S7 of the Local Plan.

B Loss of Agricultural Land 10.27 10.28 10.29 10.30 10.31

Paragraph 112 of The Framework states that “local planning authorities should take into account the economic and other benefits of the best and most versatile agricultural land. Where significant development of agricultural land is demonstrated to be necessary, local planning authorities should seek to use areas of poorer quality land in preference to that of a higher quality”. Annex 2 of The Framework defines “best and most versatile agricultural land” as “land in grades 1, 2, and 3a of the Agricultural Land Classification”. Policy ENV5 states that where agricultural land is required, developers should seek to use areas of poorer quality except where other sustainability considerations suggest otherwise. Most of the agricultural land within Uttlesford District is classified as best and most versatile land. Indeed, most of the sites that are being identified for development within the emerging Local Plan are on such land. The Council accepts that it is inevitable that future development will probably have to use such land as the supply of brownfield land within the district is very restricted. Virtually all the agricultural land within the district is classified as Grade 2 or 3 with some small areas of Grade 1. The application site is currently in agricultural use and in countryside and the development would result in the loss of agricultural land. However, the site comprises a single agricultural field that is surrounded on virtually every side by development. To the north and east are the residential dwellings along Frambury Road and London Road, to the west is the primary school and the sports fields whilst to the south are the residential properties of Theydon House, Braeside, Larks and Tormina and a substantial woodland hedgerow which separates the site

Page 40

10.32 10.33 10.34

from the agricultural land to the south. The site is therefore largely divorced from the open countryside to the southwest and is well related to the village of Newport. There are no define thresholds for assess the effects of non-agricultural development on agricultural land however one measure that could be considered as a threshold is that local authorities should consult Natural England where proposed developments would lead to the loss of 20 hectares or more of BMV agricultural land. It could therefore be logical to conclude that BMV land which is less than 20 hectares is unlikely to be considered “significant development of agricultural land as in context with the guidance set out in paragraph 12 of The Framework. As the site for development is approximately 4.5 hectares in size and although it is defined as “best and most versatile” agricultural land, it is considered that the proposed development would not result in disproportionate loss of BMV land. It is considered therefore that the development is in accordance to ULP Policy ENV5, and the NPPF.

C Design & Amenity 10.35 10.36 10.37 10.38

Design The proposed dwellings are of modern design and are of a kit construction and are designed to be carbon neutral and to be 5 star BRE home quality mark assessment. The applicants have advised that the zero carbon aspiration affects the massing, scale and orientation of the houses primarily due to the main power source of the development which is photovoltaic solar panels (PV). As a result the dwellings are designed with asymmetrical roofs to provide a longer slope which is able to accommodate a greater expanse of solar panels than a conventional modern roof. The dwellings are kit construction and will have coloured render walls with timber cladding. Because they are designed to incorporate solar panels, the roof pitches will all be of the same orientation throughout the development with the longer pitch facing south and constructed with ZED solar panels with the shorter pitch being of slate. ZED solar panels comprise an integrated system which replaces a conventional roof, and is designed to be large enough to provide all of the homes energy. The applicants have advised that as an in-roof system, with dark grey flashings and frames, it is far less obtrusive than the typical ‘bolt on’ solar panels. Despite the need to retain a longer southern facing roof pitch, the dwellings will vary in appearance as they are largely clustered around the two greens and therefore will be positioned at different angles. Some will therefore have gable ends and a clear asymmetrical roof line facing the road whilst others will have their ridge lines parallel to the road and either the solar panels or the slate roof visible. The exception to these will be Plots 1 to 6 on London Road and the commercial building which will have conventional pitched roofs to reflect those on other existing properties. In addition the dwellings will vary in appearance, due to a range of colours and finishes. A suggested palette of render colours has been provided that reflects the ad-hoc nature of the village which contains a variety of different architectural styles and with different materials and colours. Windows and doors are to be triple glazed with timber frames. Many of the dwellings have full height windows at first floor level with juliet balconies. Some of these, such as Plots 19 to 21 and 33 to 34

Page 41

10.39 10.40 10.41 10.42 10.43

have both first and second floor full height windows and balconies on the front elevation looking out over the greens. Where garages are provided, these are attached, single and have flat sedum roofs. The dwellings are mostly two storeys but the development incorporates a mix of 1, 2, 2.5 and 3 storey homes. The 3 storey properties are located mostly along the western boundary of the site adjacent to the recreation ground and the school playing field whilst the 2.5 storeys are located throughout the development. Bungalows are located along the London Road part of the site adjacent to existing properties. The design of these dwellings is different to other buildings in Newport and the area generally but is largely dictated by their eco credentials. The main difference is the asymmetrical roof and their need to have the solar panels south facing as far as possible. This will introduce an element of uniformity into the design but this will be partly countered by the fact that the dwellings will be at different levels because of the variation in levels through the site and will also be varied in design, colour and orientation so that they present different elevations to public views. It is noted that many of the objections to the development are because of the appearance of the dwellings and that they are not characteristic of Newport. However, this part of Newport contains a mix of building styles, materials and colours with traditional cottages, new dwellings, bungalows and commercial buildings. There are no listed buildings nearby and the site is not within the Conservation Area although the Conservation Area abuts the north-western corner of the site. The application proposal will add to this general mix and it is not considered that simply because the buildings are of more modern design and construction that they will be visually intrusive or out of keeping. The main issue will be to ensure that the materials and colours harmonise with those around them. The materials being suggested will assist in this and it is considered that the design of the dwellings is acceptable. The commercial building is located on the north-western part of the site to the south of the proposed access. This is a two storey building on the London Road frontage and single storey at the rear, reflecting the difference in levels of this part of the site. The ground floor has B1 units (108sqm) at the front with garaging for 8 spaces at the rear, accessed from a side entrance from the main access with a pedestrian door onto the steps that are on the southern side of the building. These car parking spaces are intended for use by the affordable housing opposite (Plots 90 to 94). On the first floor is a further B1 unit of 108 sqm with the remainder of the floor being allocated for D1 use (258sqm). The applicants have indicated that these uses are flexible and that the building is intended to be used for community or/and business uses. The building will be constructed with a timber exterior which will be a mixture of coloured timber and timber cladding. The street frontage will be partially glazed at ground floor level. As previously noted, the roof will be a standard pitch with the ZED solar panels on the southern elevation and slate on the northern one. The building is set back from the building line of the dwellings along this frontage and the area in front is designed as a small square with trees and the potential for seats and use as a communal space. Amenity The dwellings are all arranged so that the majority overlook the internal areas of open space and all have rear gardens. As previously stated, some include first and second floor full length windows but these are positioned so that they do not

Page 42

10.44 10.45 10.46 10.47 10.48 10.49

cause problems of overlooking of other proposed dwellings. The dwellings are positioned so that there are no issues of overlooking or overshadowing of each other and have been designed to take account of the change in levels throughout the site. The table at the end of this report confirms that all the dwellings will have gardens that conform to the Essex Design Guide recommended sizes and all the gardens have depths of at least 15m apart from Plots 48 to 50 and Plots 1 to 6. However, Plots 48 to 40 are positioned on a bend and as they are at an oblique angle to the properties at their rear, there are no issues of overlooking and the rear distances are between properties are acceptable. Plots 1 and 2 on London Road are one bed flats and have private amenity space in accordance with the space standards in the EDG. Similarly, Plots 3 to 6, which are also located on London Road are one bedroom dwellings and have small rear gardens. The sizes are in accordance with the EDG but while the gardens will be overshadowed to a degree because of the retaining wall at the rear, the dwellings will not as they are dual aspect. All the dwellings will have access to the open space and allotments which will provide residents with the opportunity for growing their own fruit and vegetables and for will include a Neighbourhood Equipped Area of Play (NEAP) and a Local Area of Play (LAP). Details of these areas have not yet been submitted. Concerns have been raised over safety issues because of the central location of two ponds close to the NEAP and LAP. The applicants have advised that a metal grill will be constructed just below the surface of both ponds which will ensure safety for children. The grill will be able to be removed by specialist contractors for cleaning and maintenance of the ponds which are to be used for the SUDs strategy. A condition requiring details of the safety measures for these ponds is therefore proposed to ensure that a suitable scheme is provided. The development is located at the rear of properties on Frambury Lane and London Road and attention has been paid to the issue of potential overlooking and loss of amenity of existing residents. This is especially the case along London Road where there is a significant change in levels and where the existing cottages at Lapboards and to a lesser extent, Brick Cottages, have very short rear gardens. Nos 1 and 2 Lapboards are traditional timber boarded cottages which are set on the back edge of the footpath and have rear gardens of between 5 and 7m in depth which rise by some 2.5m. Their rear boundaries form the boundary with the application site. No 1 lapboard has a 1.8m close boarded fence along its boundary with the application site whilst No 2 is unfenced. Brick Cottages have longer gardens of between 11 and 15m with a mixture of leylandii, fencing and hedging boundaries. One cottage is also open at the rear and there is a broad mown strip extending along the back of the cottages inside the application site. Seats have been positioned to look out over the site. The development would remove the mown area and seating and proposes a 1.8m fence along the boundary with these properties similar to that at No 1 Lapboards. The difference in height has been acknowledged and the application proposes bungalows backing onto these 6 existing cottages to avoid overlooking. The bungalows are set back from the boundary by 15m in accordance with the EDG and whilst the bungalows would be on higher ground than the rear boundary and would have a floor level (FFL) of 64.4m compared with a ground level of the Lapboards of approximately 59.48, cross sections demonstrate that the change in levels has been sensitively managed and there would be no unacceptable adverse

Page 43

10.50 10.51 10.52 10.53 10.54 10.55 10.56 10.57

impact upon the existing dwellings from overlooking or overshadowing. Further south, the properties on London Road have longer rear gardens and there is extensive hedging along the common boundary. Similarly the properties to the south of the site have large rear garden and a woodland boundary and it is not considered that there would be any issues of loss of amenity for these properties. Turning to the properties on Frambury Lane, these are a mixture of two storey houses and bungalows. The Elms on the corner with London Road has a short rear garden of 5m with a high wall and timber fenced boundary. The other properties have longer gardens of between 11m and 26m, some with limited fencing along the boundary and evidence of some encroachment into the application site. Some of the properties have outbuildings close to their rear boundary with one at Ambury having been turned into residential accommodation and windows inserted overlooking the site. The proposed dwellings along this boundary (Plots 76 to 94) have rear gardens of 15m and will have a distance between their rear elevations and those of the dwellings on Frambury Lane of 26 to 34m. Plots 92 to 94 and the car parking spaces for Plots 1 and 2 will back onto the short rear garden of The Elms but it is considered that the high wall and fencing surrounding that property will retain the privacy of the garden and dwelling. Objections have been received from residents of properties along Frambury Lane on the grounds of loss of privacy and overlooking. The new dwellings will have windows facing towards the existing ones and in some there is accommodation in the roof served by a rooflight. There are no juliet balconies along the rear elevations of these plots. It is considered however, that the distances between the properties are such that the amenities of both existing and future residents will be protected. In the case of Ambury, it appears that the accommodation referred to in the objection letter is ancillary accommodation and was formerly a garage. It is unlikely that a new fence along the boundary would limit the light into the rooms of the annex, especially as the property also has rooflights. The distance of the new property (Plot 88) will be 16m from its rear boundary and will therefore provide the degree of privacy that is required by the EDG. The site is subject to environmental noise from the M11, the B1383 London Road and the Primary School. The applicants have submitted a noise report which addresses these issues. and it is noted that the consultation response from the Environmental Health officer requires clarification on certain aspects of the information. The applicants have advised that further information has been submitted together with a specification of the windows and building fabric which clearly shows that the recommendations in the acoustic report have been met in detail in terms of MVHR, superinsulation, and triple glazing as standard. With regard to noise in gardens from the school, the applicants have indicated that fencing will be erected along the boundary and that an acoustic barrier will be provided where needed on the site. The plans have been changed to remove the dwellings away from the M11 and it is considered that the issue of noise from the school will be limited. Most residents will use their gardens in the evening and at weekends when there is no school activity. It is considered therefore that the issues of noise at the site can be mitigated by

Page 44

10.58 10.59

careful design. A condition is therefore proposed to ensure that appropriate mitigation is provided in accordance with Policy GEN2 and ENV10 of the Local Plan. Affordable Housing The application provides 37 (40%) affordable housing. The units consist of the following:

• 2 x 1 bed flats

• 4 x 1 bed cottage

• 2 x 2 bed bungalow

• 17 x 2 bed houses

• 11 x 3 bed houses

• 1 x 4 bed dwelling

The units are located throughout the development in small clusters apart from one cluster of 11. The Housing and Enabling officer has confirmed that the mix and locations are acceptable but has raised a concern that the internal roads will not be adopted and that the garaging for some of the units is within the Commercial building. It is understood that RSL’s preference is for the roads to be adopted and not to have to share control of the buildings. However, there is no objection on these grounds. The provision of affordable housing will be a requirement of a Section 106 which will have to ensure that appropriate access is provided at all times to the affordable elements. The application is therefore in accordance with Policy H9 of the Local Plan.

D Highways 10.60 10.61 10.62

Access to the site is proposed via a new priority junction from London Road. This is to be positioned at the north-eastern corner of the site approximately 60m from the junction of Frambury Lane and 80m from Station Road. The proposals also include the provision of a pedestrian island across London Road opposite Plot 1. The new vehicle access from London Road has a carriageway width of 6 metres to allow the free-flow of vehicles into and out of the site. It is classed as a ‘minor access road’ in accordance with the Essex Design Guide, being a road serving access to 100 dwellings or less in a cul-de-sac. The design guide requires such carriageways to have a minimum of 4.8m. The carriageway width at the entrance of the site is 6 metres wide; 0.5 metres wider than the minimum standard carriageway width of 5.5 metres. On either side of the carriageway is a shared footpath and cycle way with a total width of 2.6 metres. The site’s internal layout has been designed to be a shared surface, where vehicles, pedestrians and cyclists all use the surface to travel. The internal carriageway has been designed to encourage vehicles to travel at low speeds through the provision of a shared surface, two way movements of traffic and the provision of speed cushions. For this reason the applicants have advised that the internal junctions visibility splays have been plotted for vehicles travelling at 20 mph or less and that the provision of reduced sightlines is appropriate given the predominately residential nature of the proposed development.

Page 45

10.63 10.64 10.65 10.66 10.67 10.70 10.71 10.72

The site is intended to be an un-adopted and privately managed road. The applicants have explained that part of the reason for this is to allow for a different standard of roadway to be built than would otherwise be allowed if the road was to be adopted. A more porous surface can be used which would reduce surface water runoff. The main pedestrian access would be via the main access of London Road but a footpath is proposed onto Frambury Road between No 19 and Homlea (no 17). It is envisaged that this would provide access for children at the Newport Primary School. The Highway Authority originally recommended that the application should be refused in views of its concerns regarding some of the highway proposals. The applicants responded by submitting additional details including the required Phase 1 Safety Audit. The Audit recommended that the pedestrian island should be moved to the north and this is to be discussed with the Highway Authority at a more detailed design stage. A condition is proposed to address this. A topographical survey has been submitted and the level change measurements shown on later site plans. A revised plan annotating the level change on the site’s main access has been submitted and shows a 7% gradient from the junction with London Road. It is understood that this is acceptable. With regard to the internal layout, the highway authority raised concerns regarding the design of the roadway which it considered would lead to inappropriate speeds to the detriment of highway safety. The applicants have responded by re-designing the original one-way system to accommodate a two-way flow of traffic around the ‘lower loop’ of the site. This re-design, combined with the implementation of speed tables, is considered to improve highway safety. In terms of the concerns raised regarding parking, the applicants have advised that parking for the commercial building has been provided in accordance with Essex’s minimum parking standards and that the proposed commercial use is designed to serve the local community and is therefore not expected to generate a high parking demand. They consider that appropriate commercial parking has been provided. The applicants also consider that the total number of parking spaces on site, as discussed within the latest Transport Assessment, is over the estimated (on local census data) parking demand and therefore there it is unlikely that there will be conflict over parking opportunities. The applicants have also confirmed that parking bays with the dimensions of 5.5m by 2.9m have been provided for the dwellings. Some private parking opportunities have been drawn on the site plan to have a dimension of 2m by 5.5m; however there is sufficient space around the drawn parking opportunities to accommodate a parked vehicle, as demonstrated in the swept path analysis presented in the latest Transport Assessment. Cycle parking has been provided in accordance with the required standards. Cycle parking for residential units without a garage has been provided communally at areas close to the residential dwelling, near to site access points and on pedestrian desire lines to maximise their usage. The revisions to the scheme have resolved most of the issues raised by the Highway Authority and the latest response withdraws the objection on technical grounds. The Authority’s response raises two issues which had not been resolved

Page 46

10.73 10.74 10.75 10.76 10.77 10.78

which relate to the Byway and Highway Land and also to the matter of the adequacy of the parking which is left to the District Council to assess and determine. The Byway to the west of the application site runs along the western boundary of the primary school and is used to serve the recreation ground further south. The application proposes to transfer the slither of land between the school and the recreation ground to the school and for a staff car park to be constructed at its western end, accessed from the Byway. However, the adopted highway ends at the entrance to the primary school and from that point onwards, the Byway is not adopted and is not incorporated into the application site boundary. The applicants have advised that they do not own or control the byway and therefore cannot provide vehicular access to the land in question. Following a meeting with the your officers, the school, Education Authority and applicants, it has been decided that the car park, which is still required by the school, should be moved eastwards so that it is accessed from the development. It is understood that only staff would use this access and car park and a lockable barrier would be provided to prevent unauthorised access by parents. A lockable staff gate will be provided into the school grounds which will also allow emergency access. The footpath through the site is to be deleted so that there is no pedestrian access for children or parents. Pedestrian access will be from Frambury Lane. The school confirmed at the meeting that it did not want a footpath link from the development as this would be difficult to manage at the start and end of the day in terms of safety and staff resources. At the time of finalising this report, the amended plan was still awaited and the Education Authority has yet to comment. The applicants have advised verbally that they would be prepared to allow access to staff only though the development and this would need to be included in any S106 Agreement. Subject to receipt of the revised plan and confirmation that the proposals are acceptable to the Education Authority, it is considered that this presents a more acceptable solution to the previous proposal. It could provide the school with much needed parking and free up space within the school which could then allow future expansion. It also avoids the Byway where no rights exist for this land. In the event that the plans are not amended, it is considered that the present arrangements are unacceptable and would be unworkable. The issue of the incorporation of Highway Land is one which the Parish Council has also raised and is capable of being resolved. For the purposes of this planning application, notice is required to be served on the Highway Authority and Certificate B completed to allow the application to be determined. The fact that the site may incorporate highway land is not, in itself, a reason to refuse the application and there are procedures outside the planning system which can be used to transfer the land or to allow the land to be built on. In the event that those procedures cannot be resolved, the local planning authority may need to consider possible amendments to the scheme in the future. However, the Highway Authority has not objected to the fact that a very small area of highway land is incorporated and has suggested that the developer applies to the Highway Authority for removal of highway rights. The applicants have now served notice on the highway authority and the appropriate Certificate has been submitted. In terms of parking, the development makes provision for 211 spaces for the dwellings with a further 43 visitor spaces of which 9 are disabled ones. The total

Page 47

10.79 10.80 10.81

requirement is 211 spaces and 53 visitor spaces in accordance with the Council’s parking standards. The parking spaces are mostly provided on plot as the majority of the properties have a single garage and a parking space. Those without garages have a single parking space and a second parking space on the opposite side of the access road. Although there is a slight shortage in the visitor numbers, it is not considered that this is significant or that it would result in residents and their visitors parking outside the development on the surrounding roads. The Highway Authority raised concern about the limited parking available to the commercial building. That building will provide some 474 sqm of B1/D1 floorspace of which some 216 sqm is shown as B1 and 258 sqm as D1. These would potentially require a further 6 spaces for the B1 whereas the D1 would be based upon the type of use and the numbers of people using the facility. At this stage, it is not known what the final use will be but the building is designed to serve the local community and it is therefore not expected to generate a high parking demand. The applicants have provided an additional 4 visitor spaces in the vicinity of the commercial building. It is considered that parking provision on the site would be acceptable and is sufficient to serve the needs of future residents. It is also considered that it would not lead to problems of excess parking within the surrounding roads. Cycle parking is provided within the dwellings and there is also bicycle racks within the open space opposite the houses. The highway authority has requested a contribution of £7600 to provide 10 upgraded and 6 additional covered, secure cycle parking spaces at Newport station. The applicants have objected to this requirement on the grounds that the development is within easy walking distance of the station (200m) and therefore residents are more likely to walk to the station than take their bicycles. This argument has merit and it is not proposed to require this contribution for this development because of its proximity. The access to the site is acceptable and whilst the applicants wish to retain control over the internal road arrangements and parking by not having the roads adopted, there is no objection in principle to this. The applicants will also have control over the way the site operates in terms of parking and subject to access rights being available to the school for staff and emergency vehicles, it is considered that the proposal is acceptable and in general conformity with Policies GEN1 and GEN8 of the Local Plan.

E Infrastructure Provision to support the development 10.82 10.83 10.84

ECC Education anticipates that the proposed development would generate a requirement for up to 10 early years and childcare places, 28 primary and 19 secondary school places. According to the Essex County Council, early years and childcare provisions in the Newport Ward are limited and the neighbouring ward of Chesterford is operating at over 80°/o capacity, with limited vacancies. ECC therefore consider that that additional provisions would be needed to support the proposed development. In terms of primary school places, Newport Primary School is forecast to have a deficit of 11 places by the school year 2018-19 and a contribution for additional primary school places is therefore required. Similarly, a contribution is required for secondary school places as the Uttlesford secondary group has a deficit of 112 places by the school year 2018-19.

Page 48

10.85 10.86 10.87 10.88 10.89 10.90

ECC therefore have requested education contributions of £125,093.94 for early years and childcare, £343,250.00 for primary school and £347,631.00 for secondary school education. ECC’s consultation response was dated July 2015 and the Education Authority has been asked to confirm if it is still seeking these same amounts. A response will be reported orally at the Committee meeting. ECC are also appraising the land proposed to be gifted to the school and again their response on this will be reported to the meeting. The applicants have requested that the gift of land is taken into account and should offset some of the education contribution. The Education Authority has been made aware of this request but has initially resisted offsetting the land against the contribution as it would not help to mitigate the impacts of the development. A formal response on this matter is awaited. NHS Property Services has calculated that the additional growth in population as a result of the application will generate a need to meet that growth together with additional floorspace. As a consequence, the NHS has advised that a contribution of £32,220 is required as a result from the creation of the additional floorspace. In this respect, it is considered that a developer contribution of £32,220 would fairly and reasonable address the identified healthcare impacts. The provision of highway improvements to mitigate the proposed development has been discussed above. The proposed development is therefore considered in accordance with Local Plan Policy GEN6 and the NPPF.

F Ecology & Landscaping 10.91 10.92 10.93

Policy GEN7 of the Local Plan states that development that would have a harmful effect on wildlife will not be permitted unless the need for the development outweighs the importance of the feature of nature conservation. Where the site includes protected species, measures to mitigate and/or compensate for the potential impacts of development must be secured. In addition to biodiversity and protected species being a material planning consideration, there are statutory duties imposed on local planning authorities. Section 40(1) of the Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006 states "Every public authority must, in exercising its functions, have regard, so far as is consistent with the proper exercise of those functions, to the purpose of conserving biodiversity." This includes local authorities carrying out their consideration of planning applications. Similar requirements are set out in Regulation 3(4) of the Conservation (Natural Habitats &c) Regulations 1994, Section 74 of the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 and Regulation 9(5) of the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010. Recent case law has established that local planning authorities have a requirement to consider whether the development proposals would be likely to offend Article 12(1), by say causing the disturbance of a species with which that Article is concerned, it must consider the likelihood of a licence being granted. The tests for granting a licence are required to apply the 3 tests set out in Regulation 53 of the Habitats Regulations 2010. These tests are: - The consented operation must be for "preserving public health or public safety or

Page 49

10.94 10.95 10.96 10.97 10.98 10.99 10.100

other imperative reasons of overriding public interest including those of a social or economic nature and beneficial consequences of primary importance for the environment"; and - There must be "no satisfactory alternative"; and - The action authorised "will not be detrimental to the maintenance of the population of the species concerned at a favourable conservation status in their natural range". A Phase 1 Ecological Assessment has been submitted with the application which confirmed that there were no known habitats of protected species on the site but that additional surveys were required relating to badgers and Japanese Knotweed. The Assessment made recommendations for the retention of surrounding hedgerows and for mitigation and enhancement in relation to bats through provision of bat boxes and minimising the amount of external lighting and for invertebrates and habitat creation and planting. Further surveys were undertaken in relation to badgers and Japanese Knotweed. These identified the presence off site of badgers and appropriate mitigation measures on site are required in terms of fencing for the allotments. A small clump of Japanese Knotweed was identified in one corner of the site and the report sets out the steps required to eradicate the plant from the site. As a result of this additional ecological information ECC Ecology now raise no objections to the scheme subject to condition. As a result of the proposals and the enhancements undertaken, the current low ecological value of the site would be improved with a net positive gain for biodiversity, as encouraged by the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF). The application is therefore acceptable in biodiversity terms, in accordance with Policy GEN7 and the NPPF. In terms of landscaping and visual impact, the proposal incorporates two open spaces within the housing and these form the focal point of the development. A number of different elements are proposed within these areas including play areas, orchards, growing areas and covered caves or berms for the storage of such items as barbeques, lawnmowers and other equipment. It is expected that these would be lockable for security purposes. The site is to be surrounded by a 1.8m high fence that will also incorporate an acoustic barrier where required whilst the applicants have agreed to erect a cricket fence along the boundary with the recreation ground. The allotments are in the southwest corner and will include raised beds. At this stage the details of these landscape features have not been submitted and conditions are required to secure the submission of appropriate details and implementation. There is concern that some of the open areas have been eroded by the need to provide adequate car parking but it is considered that there is still a large area of open space within the development that will make an attractive and usable area for residents. One of the issues that has been raised with the applicants is the impact of the development from London Road. At present, there is extensive vegetation along the section from Lapboards to the retaining wall and fence of The Elms on the corner of Frambury Lane. This hedgerow forms a strong visual feature in this section of London Road and would be removed to facilitate the access and the commercial building and 6 of the plots which would be built along this frontage. Because of the difference in levels, there would be a significant slope up into the site past the commercial building which is designed to sit within the slope of the

Page 50

10.101 10.102

land. The dwellings positioned parallel to London Road (Plots 7 to 20) would be elevated some 5m higher than those taking access from London Road. The visuals presented by the applicants show these houses to be prominent from certain, albeit restricted, views from London Road and particularly near the access to the site. The commercial building is to be surrounded by a hard landscaped area with formal steps on its southern side leading up towards the housing. A swale is located at the bottom of these steps and your officers had concerns that the dominance of the dwellings combined with the necessary retaining walls and garden fencing would create a harsh and visually intrusive element along this section of London Road. Because of the change in levels there is limited opportunity for the planting of trees and shrubs to soften these views although some are proposed in the ‘square’ in front of the commercial building. The applicants have therefore provided revised plans showing the use of gabion walls on the southern side of commercial building and within the rear gardens of the houses and a criblock retaining wall along the rear gardens of Plots 3 to 6. These structures would allow planting to provide a vertical wall of greenery, thereby softening there otherwise hard and dominating structures. Further to the south, the views of the dwellings will be partially obscured by those on London Road. In terms of the wider visual impact, it is considered that the visual impact associated with this development will be localised and would be read largely as part of the wider landscape views of the village including the adjacent housing along Frambury Lane. The application site forms a logical extension to the village and with appropriate landscaping and materials/colours to be used for the buildings; it will assimilate into the landscape and this part of the village. The application is in compliance with Policy GEN2.

G Drainage 10.103 10.104 10.105 10.106 10.107

A Flood Risk Assessment has been submitted which shows that the site falls within Flood Risk Zone 1 where there is low probability of flooding from tidal or fluvial sources. The parish Council has raised concerns in relation to sewerage infrastructure in the village and that the application does not provide details as to how this problem will be dealt with. In addition, many of the third parties raise this concern. Local Plan Policy GEN3 seeks the preventions and mitigation against flooding in accordance with the NPPF. Anglian Water has been consulted on the application. They have stated that: ‘Our records show that there are no assets owned by Anglian Water or those subject to an adoption agreement within the development site boundary. The foul drainage from this development is in the catchment of Newport Water Recycling Centre, which currently does not have capacity to treat the flows from your development site. Anglian Water are obligated to accept the foul flows from development with the benefit of planning consent and would therefore take the necessary steps to ensure that there is sufficient treatment capacity should the planning authority grant planning permission. Development will lead to an unacceptable risk of flooding downstream. However a development impact assessment has been prepared in consultation with Anglian Water to a feasible mitigation solution. We will request a condition requiring

Page 51

10.108 10.109 10.110 10.111

compliance with the agreed drainage strategy. We request that the agreed strategy is reflected in the planning approval.’ Notwithstanding the capacity constraints identified in the Newport Sewage Treatment Works in Uttlesford District Water Cycle Study Stage 2: Detailed Strategy (The Uttlesford ECS) it needs to be borne in mind that this strategy was based on the findings of a high level, rather than detailed assessment work. Since completion of the Uttlesford WCS better date has become available, and coupled with the benefit of more detailed development specific study work, this has enabled Anglian Water to identify mitigation strategies and conclude that there would be sufficient capacity within the existing headroom at the Newport Sewage Treatment Works. Consequently, it is considered that the development proposal would not pose a significant risk. Anglian Water would therefore implement their mitigation strategies following the grant of planning permission. The assessment of surface water discharge and flood risk now lies with the SUDs Authority at ECC. This has confirmed that following the submission of a revised FRA and associated documents, they support the granting of planning permission subject to the imposition of conditions. The Parish Council has raised concerns also regarding problems of surface water runoff and the fact that any run off will have to discharge through the Common which is in their control. The submitted scheme proposes a range of attenuation measures which include green roofs (sedum) on the garages, rainwater harvesting through individual tanks installed in each house plot, permeable paving for roads and parking as well as the ponds and Geocellular storage (underground storage tanks). The applicants propose to construct an offsite public sewer to connect the site to the River Cam and indicate that this would be procured by requisition, private negotiation or offered for adoption, and would pass from the end of the onsite swale/geocellular storage, across London Road and passing between cottages 'Iona' and 'Quarry House' on London Road, across The Common (open space) before outfalling to the River Cam. The Parish Council state that they own the Common and have not been consulted and have not given their permission to the construction of a sewer crossing their land. The issue of whether the Parish Council has or has not given permission for this sewer is not a matter for this planning application. The ability to provide sewers across private or common land is outside the control of the planning system. However the assurance that an acceptable method of drainage can be provide is a material consideration and it is clear from the response from Anglian Water and the SUDs authority that a suitable method of drainage can be provided and require conditions be imposed on the grant of planning permission. Accordingly, this aspect of the scheme is in accordance with Local Plan Policy GEN3.

H Provision of School Land 10.112 10.113

The proposal involves the transfer of 0.36ha of land to Newport Primary school. This land comprises the rectangular area between the primary school and the recreation ground. The draft 2015 Local Plan identified the application site for development under Policy Newport Policy 3 and required the provision of 0.8ha of land for pre/primary school adjacent to the existing school site as part of the education contribution.

Page 52

10.114 10.115 10.116

That plan has now been withdrawn and there is therefore no current policy requirement that either seeks the provision of any land for the school or would support the refusal of planning permission on the grounds that the development would prejudice the future expansion of the primary school. The current offer is significantly less than that required by the now withdrawn policy. Whilst this land is adjacent to the school, it does not necessarily provide land into which the school could easily extend. It does however allow the provision of a car park provided that appropriate access is taken through the application site. This could allow the relocation of the existing parking spaces within the school site and allow the rationalisation of the school site and some future expansion. It is unlikely however, that it will be sufficient for the school to extend up to 2 forms of entry. The amended plans are still awaited showing the revised location and access of the car park. It is also understood that the car park would be increased in size from the current proposal up to 28 spaces. This would effectively future proof the school against future car parking requirements when or if the school expands. Subject to the comments of the education authority, it is your officer’s opinion that the revised proposals would provide a reasonable scheme that would secure additional land for the school and would provide additional parking space, relieving the current pressure on parking at the school.

I Other Material Considerations 10.117 10.118

Heritage Assets The applicants have submitted a Heritage Statement which confirms that there are no listed buildings adjacent to the site. The proposals will not therefore have an adverse impact upon the setting of any listed building. A small section of the north-eastern corner of the site abuts the Newport Conservation Area. The Conservation Area includes The Elms adjacent to the site and extends virtually to the new point of access on the eastern side of London Road. Views of the application site from the Conservation Area are currently limited by the hedgerow along London Road which would be lost as a result of the development. This would be replaced by a new vehicular access together with dwellings and the commercial building. Whilst it is considered that the development will not preserve the setting of the Conservation Area, it is considered that the development proposal will lead to less than substantial harm to the significance of Conservation Area. In accordance with the NPPF, when weighing this harm against the public benefits of the proposal, including securing its optimum viable use of the site and the benefits of providing additional housing, including affordable housing, as well as the provision of a significant number of zero carbon dwellings within the district, it is not considered that a refusal on the grounds of impact on the Conservation Area could be substantiated. In terms of archaeology, ECC Archaeology has raised no objection to the application subject to conditions on Programme of Trial Trenching followed by an Open Area Excavation condition.

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

Page 53

A The principle of the development is deemed to be appropriate in that it would be of a sustainable development in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework

B The proposed development would not result in disproportionate loss of best and most versatile land. It is considered therefore that the development is in accordance to ULP Policy ENV5, and the NPPF.

C The development represents an appropriate design within this location. The proposals will introduce a zero carbon development which will allow residents and neighbouring residents an appropriate standard of amenity. The development is therefore in accordance with Policy GEN2 of the Local Plan and the NPPF. An appropriate provision of affordable housing is contained in the proposals and is in accordance with Policy H9 of the Local Plan and the NPPF.

D The locations of the vehicular and pedestrian accesses are acceptable. The scheme is capable of meeting parking standards. The development therefore is in accordance with Local Plan Policy GEN1 and GEN8, the NPPF, also the Essex Parking Standards (2009) and Uttlesford Residential Parking Standards (2013).

E It is considered that the necessary infrastructure could be provided to meet the needs of the development and could be in accordance with Policy GEN6 of the Local Plan and the NPPF.

F It is concluded that the with appropriate mitigation measures by way of planning conditions, the proposal would not result in a significant harm to the ecology and biodiversity of the surrounding area and would provide appropriate landscaping in accordance with Policies GEN2, GEN7 and the NPPF.

G There are no objections from either the local flooding or water authorities and as such it is considered that the proposed development would not give rise to increase flood risk on the site or elsewhere subject to appropriate mitigation measures. Therefore this aspect of the scheme is in accordance with Local Plan Policy GEN3 and the NPPF.

H The provision of an area of land would assist the school in relieving some of its constraints by providing replacement and additional staff parking. Subject to receipt of and confirmation of the revised car parking proposals, the development would be in accordance with Policy GEN2 of the Local Plan and the NPPF.

I There are no listed buildings nearby and it is considered that the impact on the

adjacent Conservation Area represents less than substantial harm. Matters of archaeology ca be detail with by condition and the application is in accordance with Policy ENV2 and Policy ENV4 of the adopted Local Plan and the NPPF.

RECOMMENDATION – APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS subject to legal agreement The applicant be informed that the committee would be minded to refuse planning permission for the reasons set out in paragraph (III) unless by the 16 January 2017 the freehold owner enters into a binding agreement to cover the matters set out below under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, as amended by the Planning and Compensation Act 1991, in a form to be prepared by the Interim Head of Legal Services, in which case he shall be authorised to conclude such an agreement to secure the following:

Page 54

(i) Provision of Affordable Housing with appropriate access to be provided at all times.

(ii) Education Contribution (iii) Transfer of land to Newport Primary School (iv) Access to be provided to Newport Primary School (v) NHS Contribution (vi) Ensure adequate ongoing maintenance of SUDS System/details of onsite

management of SUDs if to be retained in private ownership. (vii) Payment of monitoring fee (viii) Pay Councils reasonable costs

(II) In the event of such a variation to the extant obligation being made, the Assistant Director Planning shall be authorised to grant permission subject to the conditions set out below: (III) If the freehold owner shall fail to enter into such a variation of the extant obligation, the Assistant Director Planning shall be authorised to refuse permission in his discretion at any time thereafter for the following reason: (i) Lack of Affordable Housing with appropriate access. (ii) Lack of Education Contribution (iii) Lack of Transfer of land to Newport Primary School (iv) Lack of Access to Newport Primary School (v) Lack of NHS Contribution (vi) Lack of adequate ongoing maintenance of SUDs. Conditions 1. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of 3 years

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

2. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the

approved plans as set out in the Schedule. REASON: For the avoidance of doubt as to the nature of the development hereby permitted, to ensure development is carried out in accordance with the approved application details, to ensure that the development is carried out with the minimum harm to the local environment, in accordance with the Policies of the Uttlesford Local Plan (adopted 2005) as shown in the Schedule of Policies.

3 Prior to the commencement of development, samples of the colours and details of

the materials to be used for the construction of the dwellings and commercial building shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall thereafter be carried out in accordance with the approved details. REASON: In the interests of the appearance of the development, in accordance with Policy GEN2 of the Uttlesford Local Plan (adopted 2005) and the NPPF.

Page 55

4 Prior to the erection of the development hereby approved full details of both hard and soft landscape works shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority and these works shall be carried out as approved. These details shall include:-

i. means of enclosure including details of the proposed walls and fencing including that gabions and criblock walling proposed on the site.

ii. a scheme for the erection of fencing adjacent to the recreation ground to protect residents from cricket balls;

iii. vehicle and pedestrian access and circulation areas; iv. hard surfacing materials; v. details of the safety measures proposed for all the ponds within the open

space. vi. minor artefacts and structures (e.g. furniture, play equipment, refuse or

other storage units, signs, street lighting, etc.); vii. Layout of the NEAP and LAP shown on the approved plans together with

the details of the play equipment. Soft landscape works shall include [planting plans; written specifications (including cultivation and other operations associated with plant and grass establishment); schedules of plants, noting species, plant sizes and proposed numbers/densities where appropriate; implementation programme]. REASON: The landscaping of this site is required in order to protect and enhance the existing visual character of the area and to reduce the visual and environmental impacts of the development hereby permitted, in accordance with Policies GEN2, GEN8, GEN7, ENV3 and ENV8 of the Uttlesford Local Plan (adopted 2005) and the NPPF.

5 All hard and soft landscape works shall be carried out in accordance with the

approved details. The works shall be carried out before any part of the development is occupied or in accordance with the programme agreed with the local planning authority. The safety measures for the ponds shall be completed prior to the occupation of any dwelling and shall be retained in situ at all times. REASON: In the interests of the appearance of the site and area and for the safety or all residents and visitors in accordance with Policies GEN2, GEN7, ENV3 and ENV8 of the Uttlesford Local Plan (adopted 2005) and the NPPF.

6 Development shall not commence until details of the Sustainable Urban Drainage

Schemes (SUDS) have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, in consultation with the Safeguarding Authority for Stansted Airport. Details must comply with Advice Note 6 'Potential Bird Hazards from Sustainable Urban Drainage Schemes (SUDS) (available at www.aoa.org.uk/operations-safety).The submitted Plan shall include details of: • Profiles & dimensions of water bodies • Bankside vegetation • Management of adjacent grassland No subsequent alterations 1o the approved SUDS scheme ore to take place unless first submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall be implemented as approved. Reason: To ovoid endangering the safe movement of aircraft and the operation of Stansted Airport through the attraction of birds and on increase in the bird hazard risk of the application site. For further information please refer lo Advice Note 6 'Potential Bird Hazards from Sustainable Urban Drainage Schemes

Page 56

7 Prior to commencement of construction of any dwellings, the main access shall be constructed and made available for use and shall include a 5.5 metre carriageway, two 2 metre footways and radii of 10m (as shown in principle in drawing 301/01/001 Rev V). The three accesses to be taken from London Road at their centre line shall be provided with a clear to ground visibility splay with dimensions of 2.4 metres by 50m to the north of the access and 2.4m by 45m to the south, as measured from and along the nearside edge of the carriageway. Such vehicular visibility splays shall be provided before the road junction is first used by vehicular traffic and retained free of any obstruction at all times. No dwelling shall be occupied until the repositioning of the pedestrian island as shown in principle in drawing 3a of the additional information dated 13/04/2016 has been implemented in accordance with details to be submitted to and agreed in writing with the local planning authority. REASON: In the interests of highway safety in accordance with policy DM1 of the Development Management Policies as adopted as County Council Supplementary Guidance in February 2011 and Policy GEN1 of the Uttlesford Local Plan 2005 and the NPPF.

8 The pedestrian link to Frambury Lane (as shown as B on page 45 of the Design

and Access Statement), shall be provided with a suitable all weather surface and appropriate signage. The links shall be constructed and made available for use prior to the occupation of Plots 53 to 94. Thereafter it shall be retained free from obstruction and available for use at all times. REASON: In the interests of reducing the need to travel by car and promoting sustainable development and transport in accordance with policies DM9 of the Highway Authority’s Development Management Policies, adopted as County Council Supplementary Guidance in February 2011 and Policy GEN1 of the Uttlesford Local Plan 2005 and the NPPF..

9 No dwelling shall be occupied until the bus stops on either side London Road,

Newport in the vicinity of Station Road (opposite and adjacent to) are upgraded with the provision of real time passenger information. REASON: In the interests of reducing the need to travel by car and promoting sustainable development and transport in accordance with policies DM9 of the Highway Authority’s Development Management Policies, adopted as County Council Supplementary Guidance in February 2011 and Policy GEN1 of the Uttlesford Local Plan 2005 and the NPPF..

10 The parking spaces shown on the approved plans shall be provided prior to the

occupation of the dwellings to which they relate. They shall thereafter be retained as parking spaces for those dwellings and for no other purpose. REASON: To ensure that appropriate parking is provided in the interests of highway safety and efficiency in accordance with Policy GEN8 Uttlesford Local Plan 2005 and the NPPF.

11 Electric vehicle charging points shall be incorporated within all the garages.

REASON: To provide residents with access to more sustainable forms of transport in accordance with DM9 of the Essex Development Management Policies (2011) Policy GEN1 of the Uttlesford Local Plan 2005 and the NPPF.

Page 57

12 Prior to occupation of the proposed development, a Travel Plan shall be provided and implemented which shall including the initial commitments and amended and supplemented under the provisions of a yearly report. The Travel Plan shall include a commitment to provide a Travel Plan coordinator within the residential sales office to give advice to the new residents of the development. REASON: In the interests of reducing the need to travel by car and promoting sustainable development and transport in accordance with Policy GEN2 of the Uttlesford Local Plan (adopted 2005) and Policies DM9 and DM10 of the Highway Authority’s Development Management Policies, adopted as County Council Supplementary Guidance in February 2011.

13 No development or preliminary groundworks can commence until a programme of

archaeological trial trenching has been secured and undertaken in accordance with a written scheme of investigation which has been submitted by the applicant, and approved by the planning authority. REASON: In the interests of archaeological protection in accordance with Policy ENV4 of the Uttlesford Local Plan (adopted 2005) and the NPPF

14 A mitigation strategy detailing the excavation/preservation strategy shall be

submitted to the local planning authority following the completion of this work.

REASON: In the interests of archaeological protection in accordance with Policy ENV4 of the Uttlesford Local Plan (adopted 2005) and the NPPF

15 No development or preliminary groundworks can commence on those areas

containing archaeological deposits until the satisfactory completion of fieldwork, as detailed in the mitigation strategy, and which has been signed off by the local planning authority through its historic environment advisors. REASON: In the interests of archaeological protection in accordance with Policy ENV4 of the Uttlesford Local Plan (adopted 2005) and the NPPF

16 A post-excavation assessment report shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority within three months of the completion of fieldwork, unless otherwise agreed in writing. This will result in the completion of post-excavation analysis, preparation of a full site archive and report ready for deposition at the local museum, and submission of a publication report. REASON: In the interests of archaeological protection in accordance with Policy ENV4 of the Uttlesford Local Plan (adopted 2005)

17 No works shall take place until a detailed surface water drainage scheme for the site, based on sustainable drainage principles and an assessment of the hydrological and hydro geological context of the development, has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The scheme shall subsequently be implemented prior to occupation and should include but not be limited to:

• Infiltration test results to support or otherwise revise the currently proposed rate of 10.1l/s.

• 1 treatment stage for roof drainage and 2 for roads, or as otherwise agreed

• Provision for 2759cu.m storage or amount as otherwise agreed.

REASON: To prevent flooding by ensuring the satisfactory storage of/disposal of

Page 58

surface water from the site, to ensure the effective operation of SuDS features over the lifetime of the development and to provide mitigation of any environmental harm which may be caused to the local water environment in accordance with Policy GEN3 of the Uttlesford Local Plan (adopted 2005).

18 No works shall take place until a scheme to minimise the risk of offsite flooding

caused by surface water run-off and groundwater during construction works has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the local planning authority. The scheme shall be implemented as approved. REASON: The National Planning Policy Framework paragraph 103 states that local planning authorities should ensure flood risk is not increased elsewhere by development. Construction may lead to excess water being discharged from the site. If dewatering takes place to allow for construction to take place below groundwater level, this will cause additional water to be discharged. Furthermore the removal of topsoils during construction may limit the ability of the site to intercept rainfall and may lead to increased runoff rates. To mitigate against increased flood risk to the surrounding area during construction therefore, there needs to be satisfactory storage of/disposal of surface water and groundwater which needs to be agreed before commencement of the development in accordance with Policy GEN3 of the Uttlesford Local Plan (adopted 2005) and the NPPF .

19 The details of the Sustainable Urban Drainage Schemes (SUDS) shall comply with

Advice Note 6 'Potential Bird Hazards from Sustainable Urban Drainage Schemes (SUDS) (available at www.aoa.org.uk/operations-safety).The submitted Plan shall include details of: • Profiles & dimensions of water bodies • Bankside vegetation • Management of adjacent grassland No subsequent alterations to the approved SUDS scheme are to take place unless first submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall be implemented as approved. REASON: To avoid endangering the safe movement of aircraft and the operation of Stansted Airport through the attraction of birds and an increase in the bird hazard risk of the application site in accordance with Policy Uttlesford Local Plan (adopted 2005) and the NPPF. For further information please refer to Advice Note 6 'Potential Bird Hazards from Sustainable Urban Drainage Schemes Uttlesford Local Plan (adopted 2005) and the NPPF

20 Development shall not commence until a Bird Hazard Management Plan has been

submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, in consultation with the Safeguarding Authority for Stansted Airport. The submitted pion shall include details of:

• monitoring of any standing water within the site temporary or permanent

• sustainable urban drainage schemes (SUDS) - Such schemes shall comply with Advice Note 6 'Potential Bird Hazards from Sus1ainoble Urban Drainage schemes (SUDS) (available at www.aoa.org.uk/operations-safety)

• reinstatement of gross areas

• maintenance of planted and landscaped areas, particularly in terms of height and species of plants that are allowed to grow

The Bird Hazard Management Plan shall be implemented as approved on completion of the development and shall remain in force in perpetuity. No

Page 59

subsequent alterations to the plan are to take place unless first submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. REASON: It is necessary to manage the development in order to minimize its attractiveness to birds which could endanger the safe movement of aircraft and the operation of Stansted Airport in accordance with Policy GEN2 of the Uttlesford Local Plan (adopted 2005)

21 No development shall commence until a foul water strategy has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. No dwellings shall be occupied until the works have been carried out in accordance with the foul water strategy so approved unless otherwise approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. REASON: To prevent environmental and amenity problems arising from flooding in accordance with Policy GEN3 of the Uttlesford Local Plan (adopted 2005) and the NPPF

22 No works shall commence until all Japanese Knotweed has been eradicated in

accordance with the recommendations of the Japanese Knotweed report dated May 2016. A copy of the eradication report issues by the specialist contractor shall be submitted to the local planning authority for approval. REASON: To ensure all legally protected invasive species are eradicated from the site to prevent their spread in accordance with Policy GEN2 of the Uttlesford Local Plan (adopted 2005) and the NPPF

23 No works shall commence until a Biodiversity Enhancement and Management

Plan has been produced for all open spaces. This should be a collaborative effort between the ecologist and landscape architect and include the design (or specification), implementation and management of • Ponds • Marginal planting • Tree planting • Wildflower grassland seeding • Nest boxes The Plan shall include details of the legal and funding mechanism(s) by which the long-term implementation of the plan will be secured by the developer with the management body(ies) responsible for its delivery. The plan shall also set out how contingencies and/or remedial action will be identified, agreed and implemented so that the development still delivers the fully functioning biodiversity objectives of the originally approved scheme. The development hereby permitted shall be implemented in accordance with the approved plan. REASON: To make appropriate provision for conserving and enhancing the natural environment within the approved development, in the interests of biodiversity and in accordance with Policy GEN7 of the Uttlesford Local Plan (adopted 2005) and the NPPF

24 5% of the dwellings approved by this permission shall be built to Category 3 (wheelchair user) housing M4(3)(2)(a) wheelchair adaptable. The remaining dwellings approved by this permission shall be built to Category 2: Accessible and

Page 60

adaptable dwellings M4(2) of the Building Regulations 2010 Approved Document M, Volume 1 2015 edition.

REASON: To ensure compliance with Policy GEN2 (c) of the Uttlesford Local Plan 2005 and the subsequent SPD on Accessible Homes and Playspace

Plots Bedrooms Car Parking

Garden Sizes

1 1 1 160

2 1 1 68

3 1 1 50

4 1 1 50

5 1 1 50

6 1 1 70

7 3 2 128

8 3 2 131

9 3 2 131

10 3 2 131

11 3 2 180

12 2 2 185

13 2 2 195

14 2 2 217

15 2 2 190

16 2 2 205

17 3 2 214

18 3 2 206

19 4 3 256

20 4 3 361

21 4 3 333

22 3 2 255

23 3 2 211

24 3 2 132

25 3 2 140

26 3 2 163

27 3 2 69

28 3 2 69

29 3 2 69

30 2 2 69

31 2 2 69

32 2 2 89

33 4 3 790

34 4 3 154

35 4 3 145

36 4 3 145

37 4 3 186

38 4 3 190

Page 61

39 5 3 168

40 5 3 291

41 5 3 405

42 4 3 395

43 4 3 210

44 4 3 146

45 4 3 149

46 4 3 143

47 4 3 145

48 5 3 112

49 5 3 105

50 5 3 100

51 5 3 138

52 5 3 116

53 3 2 110

54 3 2 132

55 3 2 132

56 3 2 132

57 3 2 132

58 3 2 132

59 2 2 70

60 2 2 70

61 3 2 70

62 3 2 70

63 3 2 70

64 3 2 182

65 4 3 200

66 4 3 130

67 4 3 130

68 4 3 130

69 4 3 185

70 2 2 68

71 2 2 68

72 2 2 68

73 2 2 68

74 2 2 68

75 2 2 68

76 4 3 180

77 3 2 112

78 3 2 85

79 3 2 85

80 3 2 85

81 3 2 160

82 3 2 139

83 3 2 140

84 3 2 178

85 3 2 151

86 3 2 152

Page 62

87 3 2 181

88 3 2 175

89 2 2 98

90 2 2 97

91 2 2 96

92 2 2 111

93 2 2 74

94 2 2 74

211

Visitor Spaces 34

Disabled Spaces 9

Page 63

Application no.: UTT/15/1869/FUL

Address: Land West Of London Road, Newport Essex

© Crown copyright and database rights 2016 Ordnance Survey 0100018688

Organisation: Uttlesford District Council

Department: Planning

Date: 02 November 2016

Page 64

UTT/16/1574/DFO (NEWPORT PARISH)

(MAJOR APPLICATION)

PROPOSAL: Reserved matters application for the erection of 84 dwellings and related development .Following outline approval UTT/13/1769/OP - details of appearance, landscaping, layout and scale.

LOCATION: Land At Bury Water Lane Bury Water Lane Newport APPLICANT: Cala Homes (North Home Counties) Ltd AGENT: Phase 2 Planning & Development Ltd EXPIRY DATE: 14 July 2016 CASE OFFICER: Maria Shoesmith/Alison Hutchinson

1. NOTATION 1.1 Outside Development Limits. 2. DESCRIPTION OF SITE 2.1 2.2

The site is located on the northern side of Bury Water Lane and is currently in agricultural use with the northern part separated by a semi-mature native field hedge. The northern boundary is formed by an unmanaged native hedgerow, with paddocks/scrub land beyond and the property Bury Grove further to the north. The eastern boundary of the site is bounded by Whiteditch Lane, a narrow lane providing access to a number of residential properties with Branksome and Wyndhams Croft directly opposite the site on the eastern side of the Lane. The site wraps around the redundant cucumber nursery, which forms part of the southern and eastern boundaries to the site. The nursery currently has extensive glasshouses and is bounded by hedgerows but is the subject of a planning permission for redevelopment for residential care. The site takes access from Bury Water Lane, a byway which runs along the southern boundary of the site. Wicken Water lies further to the south whilst to the west is further open agricultural land with the M11 motorway beyond.

3. PROPOSAL 3.1 3.2

The application is for the approval of reserved matters relating to appearance, landscaping, layout and scale following the approval of outline planning permission UTT/13/1769/OP in November 2013. Access was determined at the outline stage and the approved access point from Bury Water Lane is utilised for the current submitted details. The proposal is for a mix of dwellings proposed comprises 84 residential units, comprising 50 private and 34 affordable units. Private:

2 x 2 bed bungalows, 10 x 3 bed houses,

Page 65

3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 3.9 3.10

24 x 4 bed houses, 14 x 5 bed houses

Affordable: 2 x 1 bed bungalows, 12 x 2 bed flats, 18 x 3 bed houses, 2 x 4 bed houses

The access from Bury Water Lane is located on the eastern side of the site and the primary access road extends northwards from this point and then forms a loop in the wider area of the site to the north of the former nursery and contains a small green. The majority of the dwellings are arranged within and around this loop and along the eastern side of the main access road into the site. Four detached dwellings are located facing onto Bury Water Lane but set back from the lane behind an attenuation pond which extends virtually the width of the site. To the rear of these properties is the apartment block. This comprises 12 x 2 bedroom flats arranged principally over 2 floors with a second floor containing 2 flats accommodated in the roof. The original proposal was three storey but amendments to the design of these apartments has resulted in the lowering of the roofline and eaves to reduce the bulk and dominance of the building. The apartment is served by 12 car parking spaces. The development comprises mostly two storey dwellings but incorporates 21

2 storey properties at the Bury Water Lane frontage with a further 7 within the development. The development also includes 4 bungalows (5%) of which 2 are affordable units. The dwellings are a mix of detached, semi-detached and terraced with most including on plot parking. Garages are provided for the majority of the dwellings with parking in front but two small parking courts are provided to serve a group of terraces in the southeast corner of the site. These are positioned to the side of the dwellings and are well related to the dwellings they are intended to serve. Six allotments as required by the Section 106 Agreement are located to the west of the apartments and dwellings within the open space that extends along the western boundary of the site. The allotments are served by 3 car parking spaces. The western boundary of the site currently has no definition as the site forms part of an open agricultural field. It is proposed to provide a swathe of open space along most of the length of the western boundary of the site. The landscaping will continue along the northern part of the boundary outside and to the rear of the two dwellings which are positioned in this corner of the site. At its narrowest, the open space will be some 28m but will widen to 90m to the north of the apartments, where it extends up to the access road. It is proposed to construct a low landscape and ecological bund within this open space which will extend along the western boundary. The bund will be a maximum of 1.5m high and will have native hedgerow and tree planting along the boundary of the site with wildflower grass mix throughout the open space. A LEAP is proposed adjacent to the allotments and the apartments. An attenuation pond is proposed along the southern boundary of the site, adjacent to Bury Water Lane and at the lowest level of the site.

Page 66

4. APPLICANT’S CASE 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.6 4.7

The proposed development set out within the Reserved Matters application has been made within the context of the framework established by the Outline Planning Permission and supporting information, and as shown above accords with the with the provisions of the statutory development plan. In particular, it follows lengthy and detailed consideration to arrive at a scheme that both meet the above framework, and detailed policies and standards as set out in the DAS. The approach as proposed accords with the key principles of the allocation in the now withdrawn Local Plan, and they also accord with the approach established by the illustrative master plan presented and approved as part of the outline permission. There were not any parameter plans approved formally, only the location plan and access plan as set out above. As such whilst the master plan established one way of developing the site, this does not restrict flexibility of implementation as it establishes broad principles without dictating exactly what the final scheme would be. Where there are minor differences these are not fundamental to the achievement of principles set out in policy and other guidance, as set out in previous sections and below. The layout set out within the Master Plan sets out the broad delineation of land uses, open space and landscaping, and primary and secondary street infrastructure. It shows primary access from Bury Water Lane which is fixed, a looped cul de sac and minor roads off this, with a large area of open space on the western side of the development, which is additionally defined within the section 106, which is set out below, together with a LEAP within the open space. The southern part of the site also includes an attenuation pond and area for allotments. The development form indicates a medium net density layout overall excluding the open space, but has responded to the suggested character areas proposed within the outline master plan, of which included a lower density arcadian type development along the north western part of the site, whilst the area to the north of the nursery described above would be higher density based on a ‘village street’ which would be framed by houses which address the street edge, which would be carried through to the rising road through to the main part of the site from Bury Water Lane. As set out above, the open space is also locationally defined within the S106, and whilst the location of the LEAP and allotments is to be defined in application to UDC, it does define that the allotments should include: 1. 6 x allotment plots with pathways for access with wheelbarrow. 2. Allowance for 1m x 1m square shed space for each allotment 3. A metered supply of water to the allotments 4. Security perimeter fencing. 5. Car parking for allotment use. In general terms, public areas close to the houses will comprise new tree and shrub planting, whilst the areas of open space will comprise lawned areas in the main with more informal planting on the western side associated with the low bund which will be planted with wildflowers, whilst to the west of this will be a new native matrix mix woodland buffer along the site boundary to the countryside beyond to soften any impact of the development.

Page 67

4.8 4.9 4.10

The proposed LEAP is proposed to comprise a natural play space which will celebrate nature as a leading theme. Elements of play will take the shape and form of creatures and will create an informative environment. These elements will meander through the area of play giving opportunity for learning when playing. All elements will be timber with no sharp edges and of natural shape. Natural looking timber fencing and Safety Surface will maintain the overall rural character of the space. The bund is intended as a way of softening any impact of development to the countryside to west, and is proposed to be a maximum of 1.5m high, with a relatively level top and gentle slopes to allow for it to be used recreationally as part of the open space, but planted informally compared to the more formally lawned open space closer to the housing. The attenuation basin is shown on the drainage strategy drawing, which shows the strategy for both foul and surface water drainage. With regard to the latter, this shows a combination of swales and drainage pipes to drain the site via an attenuation basin. The basin is proposed to be constructed, unlined, to allow for possible infiltration, and has been designed to attenuate all storm durations up to and including the 1:100 year plus climate change (30%).

5. RELEVANT SITE HISTORY 5.1 UTT/13/1769/OP - Outline application for the erection of up to 84 houses of which

40% will be affordable, together with the provision of associated open space, a local area equipped for play (LEAP) and allotments and incorporating alterations to the width and alignment of Bury Water Lane, the provision of a new footway to the north of the Lane and alterations to the junction of the Lane with Whiteditch Land and the provision of two passing places and a footway to School Lane. Approved subject to a Section 106 Agreement on 29 November 2013.

6. POLICIES 6.1 National Policies - National Planning Policy Framework 6.2 Uttlesford Local Plan (2005) - Policy S7 - Countryside

- Policy GEN1 – Access, Policy GEN2 – Design, - Policy GEN4 – Good Neighbourliness, - Policy GEN5 – Light Pollution, - Policy GEN7 – Nature Conservation, - Policy GEN8 – Vehicle Parking, - Policy ENV5 – Protection of Agricultural Land, - Policy ENV12 – Protection of Water Resources, - Policy ENV14 – Contaminated Land, - Policy ENV15 – Renewable Energy, - Policy H1 – Housing Development, - Policy H3 – New Houses within Development Limits, - Policy H9 – Affordable Housing, - Policy H10 – Housing Mix

Page 68

7. PARISH COUNCIL COMMENTS 7.1 The Parish Council make the following comments:

Letter dated 8 August 2016 The Parish Council wishes to comment on aspects of the detailed proposal that,

having consulted with residents, the Council wishes to request as amendments to the application. The Council sets out its generic issues in previous correspondence related to Outline Planning Permission. It also expresses its primary points in the following submission where we set out the detailed requirements that we would like to be imposed on the applicant should UDC consider the scheme is acceptable. The Council requires UDC to gain and provide a response to each of our individual major concerns. The Parish Council has set out below the key issues together with our requirements of the applicant, that we would like the District Council to request of the applicant, as pre- conditions for development. Issue Policy GEN 1Access. Access to Newport village amenities for residents of the proposed development specifically there are no footpaths on School Lane or sections of Bury Water Lane. There are not sufficient existing footpaths or safe walkways to allow proposed residents to safely gain access to the village amenities from the site. We understand that the details are included in the S.278 application. although this does not include adequate lighting. The Parish Council were not provided with these details. Requirement The applicant should set out the detail such that all residents accessing the village from the site into Whiteditch Lane or Bury Water Lane can:

• Move by ODA compliant footpaths up School Lane to include levels adjustment to paths on Wicken Road and by the Surgery on Frambury Lane and the Primary School.

• The provision of a safe footpath and new bridge to the footpath known as ''The Croat" such that residents can access the village Church, Shop, Pharmacy and Post Office.

• The provision of lighting to make footpaths to School Lane safe. This would ensure that the residents would be able to freely access Newport's amenities and not feel cut off and isolated. The village benefits from the inclusion of residents into the community by having safe access to our amenities and organisations. Issue Policy GEN 7 Nature Conservation. Policy ENV 3 Open Spaces and Trees. The applicant does not own land illustrated on their plan on Bury Water Lane. This land grab will remove part of an historic area of Newport that is included in the Village Conservation Area Appraisal dated 2007. This is an important open space and we object to this. Requirement The remaining ford and green is secured by installation of a new aesthetically

Page 69

consistent bridge and bollards. That the bridge be covered in a nonslip material and the footpath to the bridge be made accessible with ODA compliant slopes for access. Issue Policy GEN 3 Flood Protection. There is inadequate detail on the application that deals with the safe disposal of grey water from the site. Our discussion with Cala shows this is mitigated by use of a 'balancing pond and marsh area'. Requirement

The applicant should set out a detailed submission so that we can understand how the site will not exacerbate existing flooding levels. The applicant should include the management and maintenance proposals. Issue Policy GEN 3 Flood Protection. The flooding assessment in the proposal is incorrect. The Parish Council's local knowledge is critical. We are aware of several annual flooding events in the Bury Water Lane, School Lane and the ford area and this information should override the applicant's assessment. Requirement Given the update on flooding above, the applicant must demonstrate how the residents' dwellings will be accessible by the emergency services in the event of the numerous flooding events that occur. For example:

• Rising of the road and footpaths and platform to mean that flood waters do not affect access.

• Provision of alternative site access in the event of flooding events. Issue Policy GEN 6 Infrastructure Provision Policy ENV 12 Protection of Water Resources. The Parish Council is aware of numerous events where sewage has entered flood waters on an annual basis. Accordingly this knowledge overrides that of the applicant. Note also, the village sewage system is already above capacity. Requirement Given the update on sewage above, the applicant must explain clearly how sewage created by the development will be managed to avoid overload of the locality and the compensation arrangements that will be provided to residents and the village in the event of such occurrences. Issue Policy GEN 2 Design Policy S 7 The Countryside Policy ENV 9 Historic landscapes. The proposal for a three storey apartment building indicates a pitched roof that is not consistent with Newport or the rural farmland setting. The nearby homes have profiles of up to two storeys. This also affects the views from Wicken Road and Debden Road. Requirement The proposal should be amended such that the roof and size profile is substantially reduced to a consistent level with nearby properties. Issue

Page 70

Policy GEN 8 Vehicle Parking Standards. The proposal has visitor parking provision. However, we believe the on-site parking is inadequate and use of "back to back" spaces makes the risk of parking in the roads likely. The site roads are not marked with sufficient speed inhibiting measures. Requirement That the proposers supply additional detailed measures to restrict vehicular speeding. The plan needs adjustment to increase car parking for visitors and residents.

8. CONSULTATIONS ECC Highways 8.1 No objections subject to conditions. ECC Ecology 8.2 No comments ECC SUDs 8.3 Having reviewed the Surface Water/Drainage Strategy and supporting documents

submitted in support of the above planning application; we would like to place a holding objection to the granting of planning permission based on the following: Inadequate Drainage Strategy

• While the DFO application has provided a summary or appraisal of the drainage on site and a proposed drainage plan, it has not provided any hydraulic modelling calculations to substantiate the storage volumes indicated on the plan.

• The hydraulic modelling calculations should show the performance of the drainage system for all events up to and including the 1 in 100 plus climate change event.

• The hydraulic design criteria must be clearly indicated, i.e. calculation of the greenfield and post development discharge rates. It is noted that the flow restrictions on the Proposed Drainage Plan are different from the ones in the previous Outline Planning application. As such this should be provided to make a proper review of the changes and how this satisfies our local design standards.

• The Drainage Strategy should provide details on how it satisfies the water quality criteria. All runoff from the different parts of the development should be treated and should follow the pollution hazard index approach as outlined in CIRIA C753 Manual. In particular, highway runoff should be given enough treatment before being discharged off-site.

• Establish the wider connectivity of the receiving watercourse from the proposed outfall point. Evidence must be shown that the existing open watercourse is connected to the downstream watercourse (Wicken Water).

• A 10% uplift on impermeable areas (roof areas) must be accounted for in the hydraulic modelling for urban creep.

Any questions raised within this response should be directed to the applicant and the response should be provided to the LLFA for further consideration. If you are

Page 71

minded to approve the application contrary to this advice, we request that you contact us to allow further discussion and/or representations from us.

Anglian Water 8.4 Our engineer has now assessed the proposal for Land At Bury Water Lane,

Newport in relation to the Foul and Surface Water condition(s) in which we were consulted. We can confirm the following in regards to our response: The Planning Statement refers to a connection being made to the foul sewerage network. A desktop analysis has concluded that the development will lead to an unacceptable risk of flooding downstream. A development impact assessment has been prepared in consultation with Anglian Water to determine a feasible mitigation solution. We will request a condition requiring compliance with the agreed drainage strategy. We are unable to comment further in relation to foul drainage at this stage but would wish to be re-consulted if any additional information is provided by the applicant. Anglian Water would also wish to be consulted on the further information to be provided by the applicant as set above prior to the Council discharging condition 5 of the outline application for this site. The Planning Statement refers to surface water being drained to an existing watercourse. This strategy is outside of our jurisdiction for comment, we therefore have no comment regarding the discharge of condition 6.

Natural England 8.5 Statutory nature conservation sites – no objection

Based upon the information provided, Natural England advises the Council that the proposal is unlikely to affect any statutorily protected sites Protected species We have not assessed this application and associated documents for impacts on protected species. Natural England advises that the Standing Advice on protected species should be followed. Local sites If the proposal site is on or adjacent to a local site, e.g. Local Wildlife Site, Regionally Important Geological/Geomorphological Site (RIGS) or Local Nature Reserve (LNR) the authority should ensure it has sufficient information to fully understand the impact of the proposal on the local site before it determines the application. Biodiversity enhancements This application may provide opportunities to incorporate features into the design which are beneficial to wildlife, such as the incorporation of roosting opportunities for bats or the installation of bird nest boxes. The authority should consider securing measures to enhance the biodiversity of the site from the applicant, if it is minded to grant permission for this application. This is in accordance with Paragraph 118 of the National Planning Policy Framework. Additionally, we would draw your attention to Section 40 of the Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act

Page 72

(2006) which states that ‘Every public authority must, in exercising its functions, have regard, so far as is consistent with the proper exercise of those functions, to the purpose of conserving biodiversity’. Section 40(3) of the same Act also states that ‘conserving biodiversity includes, in relation to a living organism or type of habitat, restoring or enhancing a population or habitat’. Landscape enhancements This application may provide opportunities to enhance the character and local distinctiveness of the surrounding natural and built environment; use natural resources more sustainably; and bring benefits for the local community, for example through green space provision and access to and contact with nature. Landscape characterisation and townscape assessments, and associated sensitivity and capacity assessments provide tools for planners and developers to consider new development and ensure that it makes a positive contribution in terms of design, form and location, to the character and functions of the landscape and avoids any unacceptable impacts. Sites of Special Scientific Interest Impact Risk Zones The Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2015 requires local planning authorities to consult Natural England on “Development in or likely to affect a Site of Special Scientific Interest” (Schedule 4, w). Our SSSI Impact Risk Zones are a GIS dataset designed to be used during the planning application validation process to help local planning authorities decide when to consult Natural England on developments likely to affect a SSSI. The dataset and user guidance can be accessed from the data.gov.uk website.

BAA Safeguarding No Comments received. 9. REPRESENTATIONS 9.1 8 letters of objection have been received and the objections raised are summarised

below:

• everything submitted with the original application is now grossly out of date and inaccurate.

• It does not take account of outstanding planning permissions in Newport for 225 houses.

• The roads in the village and particularly the roads serving Bury Water Lane cannot cope with the additional traffic.

• The services in the village are at capacity.

• Object to this proposed development and other large scale housing developments in Newport.

• While affordable housing is needed for younger people, prefer to see suitable sites outside the village be considered first.

• Takes issues with the accessibility of the site as set out in the Design and Access Statement.

• Provision of a footpath along School Lane may reduce the width of the road.

• Hazards for pupils at Dame Joyce Frankland Academy which is bisected by Bury Water Lane.

• Congestion along Bury Water Lane at school times.

• Development is out of keeping with the small village.

• inadequate measures proposed in dealing with local issues such as drinking

Page 73

water, sewage water, rainwater, road infrastructure and consequential disruption, inconvenience and loss to the local population and residents of Newport

• proposed measures inadequately address low mains water pressure in the Lane.

• The proposed upgrade to the local drains in Bury Water Lane will result in significant disruption, inconvenience and personal cost to local residents of Bury Water Lane.

• will result in significant loss of natural soak away areas and result in a sudden surge of flood water in the local area

• The proposed pond is completely inadequate to deal with the increased variation of rainwater.

• Loss of farmland

• Visual impact

• Loss of wildlife

• Loss of amenity to local people, including dog walkers.

• Site is too remote from facilities and services in the village.

A letter from Councillor Hargreaves raising the following points:

• The original permission was given in clear breach of UDC Policies C2 and S7

• Cala propose to add some more trees and this should be secured and have enforceable conditions.

• There is already a serious sewerage issue for residents downstream from the site. Anglian Water have published a document showing the sewer is not big enough and because the area has combined storm and foul pipes the sewage blows back into homes. AW should provide a solution which deals with all the applications in the area as well as solving the existing problem which is already their responsibility.

• The house designs are a bland design and should be attractive modern C21st century designs.

• Concerns regarding the low railing for the attenuation pond. 10. APPRAISAL The issues to consider in the determination of the application are: A Appearance, landscaping, layout and scale (ULP Policies GEN2 and GEN8) B Impact on residential amenity (ULP Policy GEN2) C Any Other Material Considerations A Appearance, landscaping, layout and scale (ULP Policies GEN2 and GEN8) 10.1 10.2

The principle of development on this site has previously been established with the grant of outline planning permission reference UTT/13/1769/OP. That consent set the point of access for the development from Bury Water Lane. The matters relating to appearance, landscaping, layout and scale were reserved for later approval and form the subject of the current application. The location of the previously approved access point establishes the details for the layout of the estate. The original Illustrative Layout, included in the Design and Access Statement for the outline application, indicated that the western edge of the site would be open space providing a landscaped buffer and habitat for existing

Page 74

10.3 10.4 10.5 10.6 10.7

lizard species. This is retained as per the principles set out in the outline application. The layout of the development largely follows the illustrative layout submitted with the outline planning application. The access extends northwards into the site from Bury Water Lane with dwellings fronting onto the highway. The access loops round in the northern part of the site with a small cul-de-sac off in one corner. Amended plans have been submitted which removes a cul-de-sac in the north western corner and the dwellings now front onto the northern loop. This has moved these properties further away from the western boundary and allows a more robust tree and hedge planting along the site boundary. The layout incorporates 12 x 2 bedroomed apartments arranged in an L shaped block. This is located on the western side of the main access road into the site and is located adjacent to the open space. The LEAP and 6 allotments required by the Section 106 Agreement are located adjacent to these apartments and form part of the area of open space along the western side of the development. The layout currently includes the 34 affordable dwellings required by the S106 Agreement. Initial plans did not disperse these units throughout the development in accordance with the terms of that agreement which requires that they should be dispersed throughout the scheme with no group being larger than 10. This has now been amended and the layout plan shows the affordable more equitably distributed and apart from the apartment block, in groups of less than 10. The Housing and Enabling Officer has confirmed that the revised layout is acceptable. The scale of the development is also in keeping with the context of the site with a mix of two storey dwellings and two bungalows. The existing properties along Bury Water Lane are a mix of styles with two storey, one and half storey and bungalows that are elevated in varying degrees above the road. To the rear of these is the former cucumber nursery which has outline planning permission for a care home together with associated care facilities and respite and open market dwellings (UTT/13/1817/OP). In October the Planning Committee considered an alternative outline application to provide a residential care home facility of up to 50 beds with an extra care development of up to 90 units comprising of apartments and cottages (UTT/16/0459/OP). Both of these applications propose a mix of single, two and three storey buildings but are in outline and no details are approved. The current proposals for the adjacent site take account of the illustrative layout of the application approved in 2013. Two storey dwellings are located along this boundary with their gardens backing onto the residential care site. It is not considered that the layout and scale would conflict with the illustrative proposals for the more recent application. Concerns were expressed by the Parish Council in relation to the scale and design of the apartment block. This was originally shown as predominantly two storey with a ridge of 10.75m in height and included a third storey containing two flats within the roof which had a ridge height of 12.5m. The plans have been amended to lower the overall height of the apartment block by approximately 1.5m. This has been achieved by lowering the ridge heights. The three storey section is still retained but with a lower ridge of 11m and the use of dormer windows. The two storey part of the building is also reduced in height and will be approximately 8.5m resulting in a considerable reduction in the bulk and height of the building. It is considered that the revised elevations provide a more attractive and less dominant building on this western part of the site and is more in keeping with the domestic scale of the other dwellings.

Page 75

10.8 10.9 10.10 10.11 10.12 10.13

In terms of appearance, the buildings are to be constructed of a mix of red brick, render and plain tiled roofs, and will incorporate a variety of architectural detailing including bay windows, brick detailing and timber bargeboards. In principle the scale and appearance of the proposed dwellings are considered acceptable and will be similar in character to other development that has taken place in Newport. The layout of the site is such that the separation distances are complied with and back to back distances meet the standards set out in the Essex Design Guide. In addition, all of the gardens meet the required standards as set out in the Essex Design Guide (see table at the end of the report for full details). The dwellings, with the exception of Plots 66 to 77 (the apartments), would have the required amount of parking. Parking is on plot and a large number have garages. Parking tends to be tandem parking but the spaces and garages conform to the Council’s spaces standards. The apartments (Plots 66 to 77) have only one space per flat rather than the two required. However, the flats are located adjacent to the open space and there are 10 visitor spaces provided around the flats together with three allocated for the allotments. The site generally provides an over provision of parking spaces with 241 provided for the dwellings and 25 visitor spaces of which 3 are for the allotments. This compare with the Council’s requirement of 209 spaces. It is considered therefore that sufficient parking is provided for the development and that the proposals comply with Policies GEN2 and GEN8. The site slopes relatively steeply from north to south and the northern part of the site will be visible from the surrounding countryside. This was accepted at the outline stage. The layout positions the majority of the dwellings away from the western boundary thereby allowing an extensive area of open space and landscaping to be created which will form a clear and definable edge to the development. Plots 42 to 45 in the north western corner have been repositioned and now follow the curve of the internal access road. Previously these properties were designed in a small cul-de-sac which would have positioned the buildings closer to the western boundary and their rear gardens incorporated the new western boundary. The recent revisions have moved their boundary fencing inside the site so that the hedgerow and woodland planting which forms part of the open space can be extended for the full length of this boundary. It will therefore be outside the control of the homeowners and, as a consequence, the pressure to remove this hedgerow to allow open views over the countryside will be reduced. The landscaping retains the existing hedgerow that runs through the site as a green corridor. The existing periphery boundary hedging is also to be retained and strengthened, particularly along Whiteditch Lane and the northern boundary. A 1.8m high fencing and hedging will extend along the common boundary with the care home. A LEAP is proposed as part of the open space and will contain 8 items of play including a balancing beam, a slide, a roundabout, a cradle seat swing and stepping stone. The items will be timber and will be arranged in an irregular shaped area which is fenced. It will be surfaced with a safety mulch and will include soft landscaping. The LEAP forms part of the open space and is adjacent to the apartment building and the allotments allowing to it have natural surveillance. An attenuation pond is to be located at the southernmost part of the site, immediately adjacent to Bury Water Lane. This will form part of the SUDs and will have a base level some 3m lower than the current ground levels. A 1.2m post and rail fence is to surround the pond. There have been concerns expressed regarding the limited safety afforded by this form of fencing. However, this type and height of

Page 76

10.14 10.15

fencing is not unusual around such features. The pond is overlooked by Plots 82, 83 and 84 which are located directly adjacent. Furthermore, the pond is located well away from the LEAP and therefore the area where children will tend to congregate. The design of the SUDs is still to be finalised but the applicants have advised that it is unlikely to change the overall design of this pond. The site falls within the BAA safeguarding area but no comments have been received from BAA in respect of bird management. The landscaping scheme incorporates a mixture of has native and ornamental trees and shrubs. The open space will be planted with native species of trees and hedgerow along the boundary of the site with trees planted throughout the open area. The bund is to be planted with patches of wildflower grass seed mix. The residential part of the site will be planted with a mixture of native and ornamental trees and shrubs. It is considered that the proposed landscaping will provide an attractive backdrop to the housing and the open space will create a softer transition between the housing and open fields to the west. The development is in accordance with Policies GEN2 and GEN8

B Impact on residential amenity (ULP Policy GEN2) 10.16 The application site is divorced from existing residential development by the existing

nursery and Whiteditch Lane. Tudor House on Bury Water Lane is the closest existing property but is separated from the site by an existing overgrown pond and vegetation. As a consequence, there are no issues of amenity from overlooking or overshadowing of existing properties.

10.17 10.18 10.19

The site will sit adjacent to the care home when the former nursery is redeveloped. There are no plans of the future development although indicative layouts and plans have been submitted with the outline applications. However, both applications have sought outline planning permission with all matters reserved apart from access and therefore the future design, layout, scale and appearance of the buildings is yet to be submitted. The current proposals make allowance for development on the adjacent land. The houses all have gardens surrounding the nursery site and the boundary will comprise 1.8m fencing with hedging. The dwellings have rear gardens of mostly 15m where they back onto the care site although there are a few plots that are slightly shorter with rear gardens of 13m or 14m. At present, most of the dwellings would have some 25m between their rear walls and the indicative building. It is known that some of the buildings on the care home site will be three storey but initial suggested elevations show a difference in levels and that the buildings in the most recent application are shown at a lower level than previous indications. Although, there will need to be care when designing the care home to ensure that the development will not result in unacceptable levels of overlooking on the current proposed dwellings, it is considered that the current proposals would not prejudice that scheme and appropriate levels of privacy can be achieved. Within the development, the distances between the proposed dwellings are generally in accordance the Design Guide and there should be no issues of overlooking or overshadowing. There is a difference in levels throughout the site but there are few plots which back on to each other where variations in levels could result in overlooking. Where they do exist, the dwellings have been designed to avoid direct overlooking and to retain privacy. Garden sizes are also generally in

Page 77

accordance with the standards set out in the Design guide and future residents will have a reasonable level of amenity (see table at end of report). Recent revisions to the layout to ensure greater separation of affordable housing has resulted in 4 units being smaller than the desired size for 3 bed dwellings. Overall however, the development conforms with the Council’s SPD and achieves an acceptable level of amenity for future residents and the development is in accordance with Policy GEN2.

C Any Other Material Considerations 10.20 10.21 10.22

It is noted that a substantial number of the objections from both the Parish Council and third parties relate to highway issues, particularly in terms of congestion along Bury Water Lane at school times. This was a matter that was considered at the outline stage and the Highway Authority raised no objections to the development on the current application site. The details of access to the site were considered at the outline stage. Conditions 15 and 16 of the outline planning permission relate to highway matters and require the submission of details including the construction of the access and a 2 metre footway along the western side of School Lane and passing bays prior to the commencement of development. These matters have therefore been addressed at the outline stage and are not capable of being re-considered at the reserved matters stage. Similarly, a number of the objections to this application relate to issues of flooding and foul and surface water drainage and there is a holding objection from the SUDs lead authority. Matters of drainage are covered by Condition 5 of the outline planning permission (submission of a foul water strategy) and Condition 6 (submission of a surface drainage scheme) and the applicants have confirmed that they are not seeking to discharge these or any other conditions of the outline planning permission apart from Condition 1 (reserved matters). The detailed design of the surface and foul water drainage systems does not form part of the current application and whilst the plans show how it is intended to drain the site, the approval of this reserved matters application will not discharge the above conditions. Further more detailed plans will be required but at this stage it is not envisaged that the detailed scheme will affect the layout or the landscaping of the site. It is noted that local residents have also raised concerns with regards to local flooding issues. The applicants have advised that they are currently working with the drainage authorities and the adjacent landowners to arrive at a scheme that will address the local issues of both development sites. It is the responsibility of the developer to ensure that their proposals would not result in increased flood risk and to put forward sufficient and appropriate measures to ensure increased flood risk will not arise as a result of the proposals.

11. CONCLUSION The following is a summary of the main reasons for the recommendation: A The appearance, landscaping, layout and scale of the proposals are acceptable. B There are no adverse impact on the residential amenity of existing or future

residents C There are no other material considerations which would affect the approval of the

reserved matters.

Page 78

RECOMMENDATION – APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS Conditions 1. Prior to commencement of development, samples of materials to be used in the

construction of the external surfaces of the development hereby permitted shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The development shall thereafter be implemented using the approved materials. Subsequently, the approved materials shall not be changed without the prior written consent of the local planning authority. REASON: To ensure a satisfactory standard of development in the interests of visual amenity in accordance with ULP Policy GEN2 of the Uttlesford Local Plan (adopted 2005).

2. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the

approved plans as set out in the Schedule. REASON: For the avoidance of doubt as to the nature of the development hereby permitted, to ensure development is carried out in accordance with the approved application details, to ensure that the development is carried out with the minimum harm to the local environment, in accordance with the Policies of the Uttlesford Local Plan (adopted 2005) as shown in the Schedule of Policies.

3 5% of the dwellings approved by this permission shall be built to Category 3

(wheelchair user) housing M4(3)(2)(a) wheelchair adaptable. The remaining dwellings approved by this permission shall be built to Category 2: Accessible and adaptable dwellings M4(2) of the Building Regulations 2010 Approved Document M, Volume 1 2015 edition. Reason : To ensure compliance with Policy GEN2 (c) of the Uttlesford Local Plan 2005 and the subsequent SPD on Accessible Homes and Playspace

4 All hard and soft landscape works shall be carried out in accordance with the

approved details. The works shall be carried out before any part of the development is occupied or in accordance with the programme agreed with the local planning authority. REASON: In the interests of the appearance of the site and area in accordance with Policies GEN2, GEN7, ENV3 and ENV8 of the Uttlesford Local Plan (adopted 2005).

5 If within a period of 5 years from the date of planting the tree or hedgerow (or any

tree or hedgerow planted in replacement for it) is removed, uprooted, destroyed or dies or becomes, in the opinion of the local planning authority, seriously damaged or defective, another tree or hedgerow of the same size and species as that originally planted shall be planted at the same place within the first planting season following the removal, uprooting, destruction or death of the original tree or hedgerow unless the local planning authority gives its written consent to any variation. REASON: To ensure the suitable provision of landscaping within the site in accordance with Policies GEN2, GEN7 and ENV8 of the Uttlesford Local Plan (adopted 2005).

Page 79

Plots Beds Parking Garden size

1 5 4 145

2 4 3 165

3 4 3 142

4 4 3 157

5 4 3 158

6 4 2 110

7 4 2 110

8 4 2 117

9 3 2 135

10 3 2 128

11 3 2 128

12 3 2 130

13 3 2 80

14 4 2 85

15 4 2 205

16 3 2 152

17 3 2 146

18 3 2 166

19 3 2 95

20 3 2 70

21 3 2 71

22 1 2 89

23 3 2 141

24 3 2 186

25 3 2 145

26 3 2 83

27 1 2 64

28 2 3 64

29 2 3 200

30 3 2 180

31 3 2 299

32 5 6 228

33 5 6 205

34 4 4 188

35 4 4 650

36 5 4 562

37 4 4 341

38 4 4 310

39 5 4 355

40 5 4 398

41 5 4 573

42 5 4 283

43 4 6 707

44 4 3 683

45 4 4 519

Page 80

46 5 6 142

47 3 6 165

48 3 2 226

49 3 2 237

50 3 2 224

51 3 2 145

52 3 2 170

53 4 3 161

54 4 3 155

55 4 3 164

56 4 3 233

57 4 3 263

58 4 4 187

59 4 3 208

60 4 3 303

61 5 4 232

62 4 4 314

63 4 4 416

64 5 4 420

65 5 4 306

66 2 1 shared

67 2 2 shared

68 2 1 shared

69 2 1 shared

70 2 1 shared

71 2 1 shared

72 2 1 shared

73 2 1 shared

74 2 1 shared

75 2 1 shared

76 2 1 shared

77 2 1 shared

78 3 3 147

79 3 3 158

80 3 3 136

81 3 3 152

82 5 6 390

83 4 6 426

84 5 6 433

241

VISITORS allotments 3

development 22

266

Page 81

Application no.: UTT/16/1574/DFO

Address: Land At Bury Water Lane, Bury Water Lane Newport

© Crown copyright and database rights 2016 Ordnance Survey 0100018688

Organisation: Uttlesford District Council

Department: Planning

Date: 02 November 2016

Page 82

UTT/16/2669/FUL – GREAT DUNMOW

PROPOSAL: Application to vary Condition 21 (Highway works) and Condition 26 (Bridleway) of UTT/14/0127/FUL

LOCATION: Land South of Ongar Road, Great Dunmow APPLICANT: Taylor Wimpey (Mr A Middlebrook) EXPIRY DATE: 19 December 2016 CASE OFFICER: Karen Denmark

1. NOTATION 1.1 Outside Development Limits I Protected Lane (part). 2. DESCRIPTION OF SITE 2.1 The application site is situated to the south-west of the town and comprises a

broadly rectangular parcel of arable land comprising 4.07 hectares bounded by the B184 Ongar Road to the north, the unclassified Clapton Hall Lane to the east and south and residential properties and residential amenity land to the west. A mini-roundabout lies at the north-eastern corner of the site, whilst Hoblings Brook and the A120 bypass lie beyond the site's southern boundary. The land comprises countryside lying outside the settlement limits.

2.2 The northern side of Ongar Road is characterised by a line of post-war bungalows which stand behind highway verges, to the north of this row of housing is a modern housing estate accessed from Lukin’s Drive. Clapton Hall Lane is characterised by a mixture of single and two storey dwellings, including Crofters (the exception with 2.5 storeys) and Crofters Barn, which are listed buildings. Another listed building, Gatehouse, is located close to the appeal site fronting Ongar Road to the east of the roundabout junction with Clapton Hall Lane.

2.3 The site is relatively level from east to west, but land levels slope from north to south to the south-western corner of the site with Clapton Hall Lane with a pronounced land level difference between the level of the site and the carriageway of Clapton Hall Lane at this point. The change in levels across the site overall is around 7 metres however on the parts of the site that are proposed to be developed the change in levels form the north to south in terms of finished floor levels is around 5 metres. The northern boundary of the site comprises a line of established trees and indigenous hedgerow with gaps that return along the western boundary, whilst the southern and eastern boundaries are relatively open with verges to Clapton Hall Lane.

3. PROPOSAL 3.1 The proposal relates to the variation of conditions 21 and 26 imposed on the original

planning permission granted under reference UTT/14/0127/FUL.

3.2 Condition 21 stated: “Before development commences the highway works as shown in principle on

Page 83

drawing number ITB6214-GA-010 Rev. G, to provide an appropriate access into the site from the Ongar Road/Clapton Hall Lane/Lukin's Drive Roundabout along with amendments to the access arrangements for 1-7 Clapton Hall Lane shall be implemented in accordance with details that shall first have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.”

3.3 It is proposed to amend the wording to: “Before the first occupation of any dwelling on site the highway works as shown in principle on drawing number ITB6214-GA-010 Rev. G, to provide an appropriate access into the site from the Ongar Road/Clapton Hall Lane/Lukin's Drive Roundabout along with amendments to the access arrangements for 1-7 Clapton Hall Lane shall be implemented in accordance with details that shall first have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.”

3.4 Condition 26 stated: “Before occupation of any dwelling, the bridleway as shown in principle on Architectus drawing number 12/030/11A running from Ongar Road along the western and southern boundaries shall be provided in accordance with details that shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to commencement of development.”

3.5 It is proposed to amend the wording to: “Prior to the occupation of the last dwelling on site, the bridleway as shown in principle on Architectus drawing number 12/030/11A running from Ongar Road along the western and southern boundaries shall be provided in accordance with details that shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to commencement of development.”

4. APPLICANT’S CASE 4.1 Since the submission of the original planning application, relevant Local Plan Policy

has not changed to any significant degree. However, in this time Great Dunmow Parish has been working towards its Neighbourhood Plan, which has reached an advanced stage, having been through independent Examination. Within the Neighbourhood Plan two policies, which related to footpaths and bridleways have emerged and, subject to a local referendum, these policies are likely to be adopted, along with the Plan itself.

4.2 The policies, GA1 and GA2 seek to secure and enhance existing public footpaths and bridleways, as well as ensure that new development delivers additional rights of way to enhance the local network overall. The proposals the subject of this application, solely seek to amend the point of delivery of the planned access arrangements for the development, from delivery prior to commencement of the development, back to delivery prior to the first occupation of the development, and the delivery of the bridleway from prior to the first occupation to prior to the last occupation.

4.3 The works envisaged in the original application, which were subsequently conditioned, will still be delivered by Taylor Wimpey as originally envisaged, only later in the construction process.

4.4 The proposals will therefore be compliant with the objectives of Policies GA1 and

Page 84

GA2, which, it should be remembered, are still emerging and are yet to be finally adopted.

5. RELEVANT SITE HISTORY 5.1 UTT/14/0127/FUL: Planning application for the erection of 99 dwellings, including

40 percent affordable housing, facilitated by new vehicular and pedestrian access from the roundabout junction of Ongar Road and Clapton Hall Lane, public open space including a children’s play area, green corridors, associated parking and landscaping – Conditionally approved 3 December 2015.

6. POLICIES 6.1 National Policies - National Planning Policy Framework - National Planning Practice Guidance 6.2 Uttlesford Local Plan 2005 - Policy S7: The Countryside

- Policy GEN1: Access - Policy GEN2: Design - Policy GEN3: Flood Protection - Policy GEN6: Infrastructure Provision to Support Development - Policy GEN7: Nature Conservation - Policy GEN8: Vehicle Parking Standards - Policy E4: Farm Diversification: Alternative use of Farmland - Policy ENV2: Development affecting Listed Buildings - Policy ENV5: Protection of agricultural land - Policy ENV10: Noise Sensitive Development - Policy ENV13: Exposure to poor air quality - Policy ENV15: Renewable Energy - Policy H9: Affordable Housing - Policy H10: Housing Mix

6.3 Great Dunmow Neighbourhood Plan (not yet adopted) GA1: Core Footpath and Bridleway Network

GA2: Integrating Development (Paths and Ways)

7. TOWN COUNCIL COMMENTS 7.1 None received. 8. CONSULTATIONS ECC Highways 8.1 The highway authority accepts the reason to vary condition 26 of planning consent

UTT/14/0127/FUL and is happy for the provision of the bridleway to be prior to the occupation of the last dwelling on site. The Construction Management Plan drawing no. 12896-ARC-3230 Rev C1 shows a construction access off Ongar Road at the western end of the site which the

Page 85

highway authority considers acceptable for the duration of the site construction. The position of this construction access will provide easier access for construction vehicles and consequently less disturbance and noise for the occupants of Clapton Hall Lane. The highway authority therefore finds acceptable the variation of Condition 21 for the provision of an access into the site from the Ongar Road/Clapton Hall Lane/Lukin’s Drive roundabout to be carried out prior to first occupation of any dwelling.

Highways England 8.2 Offer no objection. 9. REPRESENTATIONS 9.1 This application has been advertised and 21 letters of representation have been

received including from the British Horse Society and the Flitch Way Action Group. Notification period expired 25 October 2016.

9.2 Object to variation of condition 26

Weak excuse linked with ‘Health and Safety’ to try and get out of condition All developers along route can say that until all sections are complete the route will not be continuous Will be some considerable delay in getting the last property built/occupied Will be a number of excuses for not completing the bridleway during that period No agreed date for delivery of bridleway would give latitude for indefinite delay Despite adoption of Cycle Strategy this development has not been made to comply with the requirements to deliver a cycle way through site Any risk of losing bridleway will put Flitch Way project at risk Would fail to meet aspirations of NPPF and Neighbourhood Plan If construction access from Ongar Road is required the bridleway needs to be fenced off from the proposed access for construction traffic No consideration of wildlife corridor in proposed amendment Loss of community trust and project and UDC if decision is not enforced This features in both the Neighbourhood and Local Plan and is actively supported by stakeholders including the Ramblers Association, the British Horse Society and Friends of the Flitch Way

9.3 Flitch Way Action Group:

There is no good reason why Condition 26 should be changed. It is claimed that this removal is necessary as a matter of safety but this reason is not viable and does not stand up to further consideration. The grass surfaced Bridleway is to be provided close to the edge of and within the environmental strip. The larger width of this strip is taken up by a Swale that provides surface water drainage for the whole of the development. The Swale and grass bridleway provide a corridor for newts. This newt corridor will need to be maintained throughout the construction work on site and therefore a safe and secure environment is provided for the bridleway. The optimum time for construction of the grass track is with the construction of the Swale and balancing pond and these by necessity would be programmed with the groundwork's for construction of the roads within the site. The site roads provide access for the following construction of the housing units. The requirement for the bridleway to be provided before provision of the housing is therefore logical and practical.

Page 86

10. APPRAISAL The issue to consider in the determination of the application is: A Whether it would be justifiable in policy terms to vary Conditions 21 and 26 of

UTT/14/0127/FUL (NPPF; ULP Policies S7, GEN1; Great Dunmow Neighbourhood Plan Policies GA1, GA2)

10.1 The Planning Practice Guidance states that, “In deciding an application under

section 73, the local planning authority must only consider the disputed condition/s that are the subject of the application – it is not a complete re-consideration of the application.” (Paragraph: 031 Reference ID: 21a-031-20140306)

10.2 Paragraph 206 of the NPPF states that “Planning conditions should only be imposed

where they are:

1. Necessary; 2. Relevant to planning and; 3. To the development to be permitted; 4. Enforceable; 5. Precise and; 6. Reasonable in all other respects.”

10.3 The two conditions the subject of the application relate to the amendment to the

timing of the provision of the main access to the site from before the commencement of development to prior to the first occupation (condition 21); and the delay in the provision of the bridleway link from prior to first occupation to prior to last occupation (condition 26).

10.4 Condition 21 relates to the timing of the provision of the site access from Ongar

Road/Clapton Hall Lane/Lukin’s Drive roundabout together with amendments to the access arrangements for 1-7 Clapton Hall Lane. The condition required this work to be carried out before the commencement of development on site.

10.5 This condition was requested by ECC Highways to ensure that the proposals complied with the Highway Authority’s Development Management Policies and the Uttlesford Local Plan Policy GEN1. This condition as imposed meets the 6 tests as set out in the NPPF.

10.6 The request to vary condition to prior to the first occupation has arisen as it is now proposed to construct a construction access from Ongar Road. ECC Highways raise no objections to the principle of this access point during the construction works, subject to conditions requiring the prior approval of the details of the access and its subsequent closure. Therefore, they consider that the request to vary condition 21 is acceptable.

10.7 The relocation of the construction access would result in less noise and disturbance to the properties located in Clapton Hall Lane. Whilst there would be some increased disturbance to the properties in Ongar Road, the road is wider at this point and the properties are set back from the highway to a greater degree than those in Clapton Hall Lane. Whilst the provision of a permanent site access in this point may not be considered acceptable in highway safety terms, it is considered that the temporary access would be acceptable.

10.8 The proposed amended wording of condition 21 is considered to meet the six tests

Page 87

set out in the NPPF. However, additional conditions will be required to ensure that the details of the proposed temporary construction access can be approved prior to works commencing on site. Furthermore, in order to ensure the temporary access does not become a permanent feature, it is necessary to condition that it is closed and the highway verge is reinstated following the completion of the works.

10.9 Condition 26 relates to the timing of the delivery of the bridleway, which is to provide part of the missing links to the Flitch Way. This will, in time, connect with the additional links to be provided in the Ongar Road North and the Smith’s Farm sites. The bridleway runs along the western and southern sides of the site and forms part of the wildlife corridor within the site.

10.10 It is proposed to delay the delivery of the link until the occupation of the last dwelling on the site rather than prior to the first occupation. The applicant states that health and safety concerns have resulted in the request with concerns about horses and riders being in a confined space adjacent to a building site.

10.11 Essex County Council, who is to take on the ownership and management of the bridleway on completion of this link is satisfied with the request to delay the delivery. However, this has raised significant concerns with local residents and members of the Flitch Way Action Group. The representations argue that the reasons put forward are weak and could be seen as a way of not delivering the link at all. Particular concern is raised about the fact that the developers could choose to not build the last dwelling and therefore not have to deliver the link.

10.12 In principle there are no significant concerns regarding the delayed delivery of the Flitch Way Link which is required in order to comply with the policies GA1 and GA2 in the Great Dunmow Neighbourhood Plan. However, the concerns of the objectors are noted and therefore it is proposed to amend the wording to have a double trigger point, with the earliest point being mandatory.

10.13 It is therefore proposed to amend the wording to the following, which is considered to meet the six tests as set out in the NPPF: “Prior to the occupation of the last dwelling on site, or within 2 years from the date of this permission, whichever is the sooner, the bridleway as shown in principle on Architectus drawing number 12/030/11A running from Ongar Road along the western and southern boundaries shall be provided in accordance with details that shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to commencement of development.”

11. CONCLUSION 11.1 The proposed amended wording to condition 21 is considered acceptable but

additional conditions will be required to ensure the construction access is constructed in a safe manner and is permanently closed at the end of the construction period.

11.2 There is no objection in principle to the proposed delay in the delivery of the link to the Flitch Way, but a double trigger point is required to ensure that it is delivered in a timely manner.

RECOMMENDATION – APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS Conditions

Page 88

1. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of 3 years

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

2. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the approved plans as set out in the Schedule attached to the planning permission UTT/14/0127/FUL. REASON: For the avoidance of doubt as to the nature of the development hereby permitted, to ensure development is carried out in accordance with the approved application details, to ensure that the development is carried out with the minimum harm to the local environment, in accordance with the Policies of the Uttlesford Local Plan (adopted 2005) as shown in the Schedule of Policies.

3. The development hereby shall be carried out in accordance with the approved materials as detailed in UTT/16/1432/DOC. REASON: In the interests of the appearance of the development in accordance with Policy GEN2 of the Uttlesford Local Plan (adopted 2005).

4. The development hereby approved shall be carried out in accordance with the full details of both hard and soft landscape works as approved under UTT/16/0866/DOC. REASON: The landscaping of this site is required in order to protect and enhance the existing visual character of the area and to reduce the visual and environmental impacts of the development hereby permitted, in accordance with Policies GEN2, GEN8, GEN7, ENV3 and ENV8 of the Uttlesford Local Plan (adopted 2005).

5. All hard and soft landscape works shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. The works shall be carried out before any part of the development is occupied or in accordance with the programme agreed with the local planning authority. REASON: In the interests of the appearance of the site and area in accordance with Policies GEN2, GEN7, ENV3 and ENV8 of the Uttlesford Local Plan (adopted 2005).

6. The development permitted by this planning permission shall only be carried out in accordance with the approved Flood Risk Assessment (FRA), prepared by Hannah Reed & Associates, reference C211058/MH/January 2014, and the following mitigation measures: 1. Limiting the surface water run-off generated by the 1 in 100 year storm event, inclusive of an allowance for climate change, so that it will not exceed the current run-off from the site of 10.76l/s. 2. Provide surface water attenuation on site for a volume of 1200m. in accordance with drawing number C-211058/110P3. REASON: To accommodate storm events up to and including the 1 in 100 year with climate change AND To mimic the current discharge rates to ensure flood risk is not increased off site, in accordance with Uttlesford Local Plan Policy GEN3 (adopted

Page 89

2005).

7. No building hereby permitted shall be occupied until the sustainable drainage system for the site has been completed in accordance with the submitted details. The sustainable drainage system shall be managed and maintained thereafter in accordance with the agreed management and maintenance plan. REASON: To ensure suitable drainage for the development in accordance with Policies GEN2 and GEN3 of the Uttlesford Local Plan (adopted 2005). JUSTIFICATION: The ongoing maintenance of the SUDS system needs to be secured before development, as initial development works can prejudice ongoing SUDS works.

8. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out strictly in accordance with the noise mitigation measures approved under reference UTT/16/0866/DFO. The scheme as approved shall be fully implemented prior to occupation and shall be retained thereafter and not altered without prior approval. REASON: In the interests of the amenity in accordance with Policies GEN2, and GEN4 of the Uttlesford Local Plan (adopted 2005).

9. The development hereby permitted shall be implemented in accordance with the scheme of mitigation/enhancement contained within the Ecology Update Report dated July 2013 submitted with the application in all respects and any variation thereto shall be agreed in writing by the local planning authority before such change is made. REASON: In the interest of the protection of the wildlife value of the site in accordance with Policy GEN7 of the Uttlesford Local Plan (adopted 2005). JUSTIFICATION: It is imperative that noise measures are addressed to ensure that they are in place before first occupation of the development.

10. The scheme of archaeological works has been carried out in accordance with the details submitted and approved under UTT/16/0866/DOC.

11. The archaeological fieldworks have been satisfactorily completed in accordance with the details submitted under UTT/16/2887/DOC.

12. The applicant will submit to the local planning authority a post-excavation assessment (to be submitted within six months of the completion of fieldwork, unless otherwise agreed in advance with the Planning Authority). This will result in the completion of post-excavation analysis, preparation of a full site archive and report ready for deposition at the local museum, and submission of a publication report. REASON: In the interests of archaeological protection in accordance with Policy ENV4 of the Uttlesford Local Plan (adopted 2005) and the NPPF.

13. Development shall not commence until a Bird Hazard Management Plan has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The submitted plan shall include confirmation of: - planting and plant maintenance in the perimeter of waterbodies; - measures to limit access during the development stage e.g. goose proof fencing

Page 90

surrounding all waterbodies; - signs deterring people from feeding the birds; - access to the site for representatives of Stansted Airport as required for the purposes of monitoring bird activity. The Bird Hazard Management Plan shall be implemented as approved, prior to the start of development and remain in force for the life of the development. No subsequent alterations to the plan are to take place unless first submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. REASON: It is necessary to manage the development in order to minimise its attractiveness to birds which could endanger the safe movement of aircraft and the operation of Stansted Airport. JUSTIFICATION: Matters of aviation safety can be prejudiced if matters are not addressed before development takes place. As matters related to the construction process can prejudice highway safety.

14. A landscape management plan, including long term design objectives, management responsibilities and maintenance schedules for all landscape areas, other than small, privately owned, domestic gardens, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority before occupation of the development or any phase of the development, whichever is the sooner, for its permitted use. The landscape management plan shall be carried out as approved. REASON: In the interests of the appearance of the site and area in accordance with Policies GEN2 and GEN7 of the Uttlesford Local Plan (adopted 2005).

15. The development shall be carried out strictly in accordance with the tree protection measures submitted and approved under reference UTT/16/0866/DOC. REASON: To ensure the protection of trees within the site in accordance with Policies GEN2, GEN7 and ENV8 of the Uttlesford Local Plan (adopted 2005).

16. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any order revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification), no fences, gates or walls shall be erected within the curtilage of any dwellinghouse forward of any wall of that dwellinghouse which fronts onto a road. REASON: In the interests of protecting the character and amenities of the locality in accordance with Policy GEN2 of the Uttlesford Local Plan (adopted 2005).

17. The dwellings shall not be occupied until a means of vehicular, pedestrian and/or cyclist access has been constructed in accordance with the approved plans. REASON: In the interests of highway safety, in accordance with Policy GEN1 of the Uttlesford Local Plan (adopted 2005).

18. The garages and car parking spaces hereby permitted and shown on Planning Layout Plan 12/030/111E shall be kept available for the parking of motor vehicles at all times The garage/car spaces shall be used solely for the benefit of the occupants of the dwelling of which it forms part and their visitors and for no other purpose and permanently retained as such thereafter. REASON: In the interests of the highway safety and ease of movement and in

Page 91

accordance with Policies GEN1, GEN2 and GEN8 of the Uttlesford Local Plan (adopted 2005) and the ECC Parking Standards (adopted 2009).

19. Before development commences, a Construction Management Plan including any phasing arrangements and which includes: a. adequate turning and off loading facilities for delivery/construction vehicles within the limits of the site b. an appropriate construction access c. an adequate parking area clear of the highway for those employed in developing the site d. wheel cleaning facilities e. dust suppression measures f. visitors and contractors parking facilities g. secure on site storage facilities Details shall be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved details shall be implemented on commencement of development and maintained during the period of construction. REASON: In the interests of amenity and highway safety, in accordance with Uttlesford Local Plan Policies GEN4 and GEN1 (adopted 2005). JUSTIFICATION: By definition all construction method processes need to be agreed before the commencement of development. (Currently being considered under UTT/16/2746/DOC)

20. Before development commences details showing the means to prevent the discharge of surface water from the development onto the highway shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall be carried out in its entirety prior to the access becoming operational and shall be retained at all times. REASON: To prevent hazards caused by water flowing onto the highway and to avoid the formation of ice on the highway in the interest of highway safety, in accordance with Uttlesford Local Plan Policy GEN1 (adopted 2005). JUSTIFICATION: It is imperative that the required highway improvements are carried out before any other development is carried out. The highway improvements will also minimise the impact of the construction phase of the development.

21. Before the first occupation of any dwelling on site the highway works as shown in principle on drawing number ITB6214-GA-010 Rev. G, to provide an appropriate access into the site from the Ongar Road/Clapton Hall Lane/Lukin's Drive Roundabout along with amendments to the access arrangements for 1-7 Clapton Hall Lane shall be implemented in accordance with details that shall first have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. REASON: To provide safe access and adequate inter-visibility between the users of the access and the existing public highway for the safety and convenience of users of the highway and of the access, in accordance with Uttlesford Local Plan Policy GEN1 (adopted 2005).

26. Prior to the occupation of the last dwelling on site, or within 2 years from the date of

Page 92

this permission, whichever is the sooner, the bridleway as shown in principle on Architectus drawing number 12/030/11A running from Ongar Road along the western and southern boundaries shall be provided in accordance with details that shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to commencement of development. REASON: In the interests of highway safety, efficiency and accessibility, in accordance with Great Dunmow Neighbourhood Plan Policies GA1 and GA2.

27. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out strictly in accordance with the slab level details approved under reference UTT/16/0866/DOC. REASON: In order to minimise the visual impact of the development in the street scene and to protect the amenities of neighbours, in accordance with Uttlesford Local Plan Policy GEN2.

Page 93

Application no.: UTT/16/2669/FUL

Address: Land South Of Ongar Road, Great Dunmow

© Crown copyright and database rights 2016 Ordnance Survey 0100018688

Organisation: Uttlesford District Council

Department: Planning

Date: 02 November 2016

Page 94

UTT/16/1997/FUL (SAFFRON WALDEN))

(Referred to Committee by Cllr Lodge. Reasons: Over-development, access problems, adding to Air Quality Management Area exceedances)

PROPOSAL: Erection of 4 No. detached dwellings and garages with ancillary

landscaping and access arrangements. LOCATION: Land north of Farmadine Grove, Saffron Walden. APPLICANT: Camstead Homes c/o agent. AGENT: Don Proctor Limited, 23 Church Street, Willingham, Cambridge. EXPIRY DATE: 8 September 2016. CASE OFFICER: Clive Theobald.

1. NOTATION 1.1 Within Development Limits / Part within Conservation Area (south-west corner). 2. DESCRIPTION OF SITE 2.1 The site consists of a rectangular strip of overgrown land of 0.25 ha to the east of

South Road and the north of Farmadine Grove which formerly comprised part of the railway line though Saffron Walden. Farmadine Grove is an unmade private cul-de-sac road which has a line of dwellings along its south side of varying ages, styles and sizes. A primary school exists to the immediate north of the site further along South Road, whilst infill housing exists along the former railway alignment to the north-east of the site linking into Victoria Avenue and to the south-east across the railway bridge (South Road).

2.2 A belt of mature trees exists along the site’s north-western boundary, whilst a line

of further trees exists along the site’s south-eastern boundary onto Farmadine Grove with a short line of 2m high close-boarded fencing running from the end of this line to the corner of South Road onto the old railway bridge. The site is level through the site, although slopes down from the north-east and south-west flank boundaries.

3. PROPOSAL 3.1 This full application proposes the erection of 4 No. detached dwellings with

detached garages with a 6m wide shared surface private service road running north-east-south-west parallel with the former railway line alignment with new vehicular access from Farmadine Grove.

3.2 The dwellings proposed would comprise two house types with House Type A

comprising 3 No. 2 storey 4 bed units (Plots 1, 2 and 3) and House Type B comprising a single 2½ storey 5 bed unit situated at the end of the service road (Plot 4). Plots 1, 2 and 3 would each have a single garage with hardstanding to the front, whilst Plot 4 would have a double garage and double hardstanding space. A turning head is shown between Plots 2 and 3, whilst visitor/additional parking is shown at the beginning of the service road. Nominal landscaping is

Page 95

shown adjacent to the parking area. The dwellings would be externally clad with slate and facing brick with cut arches where shown.

4. APPLICANT’S CASE 4.1 The applicant’s agent has submitted a Planning, Design and Access Statement

setting out the merits and planning policy justification for the proposed development, the conclusions of which are stated as follows:

• This is a brownfield site in a sustainable location where a small-scale residential development of a high quality design and materials can be provided and is fully in accordance with national and Development Plan policy;

• Existing access arrangements are used and as explained above this private access driveway will be of a sufficient width to enable all vehicles to enter and leave the site in forward gear and to be accessed by emergency and refuse vehicles as appropriate. The access arrangements are acceptable to the Highways Authority;

• The design of the dwellings, the levels of the site and the orientation of the site in relation to neighbouring properties means there will be no adverse impact on residential amenity in the locality;

• There are no constraints to the immediate development of this site as proposed;

• This proposal will bring this derelict and unused brownfield site back into a productive use and make a small but significant contribution to the Local Authority’s housing requirement.

4.2 The application is also accompanied by a Flood Risk Assessment and Drainage

Strategy, an Ecology Report and a Contaminated Land Risk Assessment. 5. RELEVANT SITE HISTORY 5.1 Planning permission was refused by the Council under its delegated powers

arrangements on 24 March 2016 for the erection of 4 No. detached dwellings and garages with ancillary landscaping and access arrangements at Land North of Farmadine Grove – Camsted Homes c/o agent (UTT/16/0122/FUL refers). The reasons for refusal as cited within the Council’s decision notice were as follows: 1 The proposed development in terms of its location would lead to loss of designated open space and trees contrary to ULP Policy ENV3 of the adopted Local Plan (2005). 2 The location and design of the proposed access in addition with the traffic generated by the development would adversely harm the living conditions of the neighbouring properties in close proximity to the proposed access contrary to ULP Policy GEN2 of the adopted Local Plan (2005). 3 The location and design of the proposed access with its proximity at the junction of Farmadine Grove and South Road would adversely harm other road users, road safety and those mobility is impaired contrary to ULP Policy GEN1 of the adopted Local Plan (2005). 4 The proposed development would not preserve or enhance the setting or character of the heritage asset by reason of the form, scale, massing, orientation

Page 96

and materials proposed and therefore contrary to paragraphs 128 and 134 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) and ULP Policy ENV1 of the adopted Local Plan (2005).

6. POLICIES 6.1 National Policies - National Planning Policy Framework 6.2 Uttlesford Local Plan (2005) - ULP Policy S1 – Settlement Boundaries for the Main Urban Areas

- ULP Policy H1 – Housing development - ULP Policy SW2 - Residential Development Within Saffron Walden’s Built-Up Area. - ULP Policy ENV1 – Design of development within Conservation Areas - ULP Policy ENV3 – Open Spaces and Trees - ULP Policy ENV13 – Exposure to poor air quality - ULP Policy ENV14 – Contaminated land - ULP Policy H10 – Housing Mix - ULP Policy GEN1 – Access - ULP Policy GEN2 – Design - ULP Policy GEN3 – Flood Protection - ULP Policy GEN7 – Nature Conservation - ULP Policy GEN8 – Parking Standards

- ECC Parking Standards – “Design and Good Practice” (September 2009)

- ULP Parking Standards (February 2013) 7. TOWN COUNCIL COMMENTS 7.1 The Committee objects to this application on the following grounds (all policies

quotes are in accordance with the UDC Local Plan adopted 20th January 2005): 1. The development is contrary to Policy ENV3 - Open Spaces and Trees - open space and trees would be lost as a direct result of the proposed development; 2. The development is contrary to Policy ENV8 - Other Landscape elements of importance for Nature Conservation - the development would seek to remove and destroy established areas of natural growth and wildlife; 3. The development is contrary to Policy GEN 1 Access - it is noted that access to the site would be difficult and the creation of an access road would have a direct, negative impact on surrounding properties; 4. The development is contrary to Policy GEN 2 Design - the proposed development is not compatible with the scale, form, layout, appearance or materials of surrounding buildings and would thus have a negative impact on the surrounding area; 5. It is noted that the development would create run-off from rain water to existing properties as the current area acts as a good flood defence with trees and shrub-land soaking up surface water. The development would result in run-off potentially resulting in flooding of nearby properties. It is further noted that the development would be in close proximity to the RA Butler School and concerns are also expressed about potential flooding of this school facility. 6. It is noted that the proposed development would sit on a higher level than existing residential properties and there are therefore differing levels in the

Page 97

proposed development land to the existing residential area. A slab level agreement should be implemented which would seek to address the differing foundation levels.

8. CONSULTATIONS Essex County Council Highways 8.1 The Highway Authority has no comments to make on this proposal from a

highway or transportation perspective as it is not contrary to the transportation policies contained within the Highway Authority’s Development Management Policies adopted as County Council Supplementary Guidance in February 2011 and Uttlesford Local Plan Policy GEN1. Informative: It is noted that Farmadine Grove is a private road.

Essex County Council Ecology 8.2 No objections. My comments refer to the report entitled “Land off Farmadine Grove / Saffron

Walden / Essex (Green Environmental Consultants December 2015”). All recommendations in this report should be followed, including those for bio-diversity enhancements.

8.3 The following informatives should be appended to any planning permission

granted: Breeding bird informative:

The applicant is reminded that, under the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 as amended (section 1), it is an offence to remove, damage, or destroy the nest of any wild bird while that nest is in use or being built. Planning consent for a development does not provide a defence against prosecution under this act. Trees and scrub are likely to contain nesting birds between 1st March and 31st August inclusive. Nesting birds are assumed to be present within vegetation on site between the above dates, unless a recent survey has been undertaken by a competent ecologist and has shown it is absolutely certain that birds are not present. Informative for reptiles:

Should any reptiles or evidence of reptiles be found prior to or during the development, all works must stop immediately and an ecological consultant or the Council’s ecologist contacted for further advice before works can proceed. All contractors working on site should be made aware of the advice and provided with the contact details of a relevant ecological consultant.

Environmental Health Officer 8.4 Recommended Decision: Approval subject to conditions.

Comments:

8.5 Contaminated land (ULP Policy ENV14):

Page 98

The application site is on the former railway. The submitted contamination assessment by Nott Group indicates that contamination potentially harmful to human health is present, but that it would be practical to remediate the site to bring it to a condition suitable for the intended end use. Conditions are required to ensure adequate assessment, remediation and validation of the site, and to cover any unexpected contamination found during the course of the development. The contamination assessment Ref. 72498/R/002 has used some out-of-date and unspecified assessment criteria, particularly with respect to the lead concentration. The site investigation and soil testing are accepted as adequate, but the health risk assessment and remediation scheme must be based on current and fully defined assessment criteria such as LQM/CIEH S4ULs at the appropriate Soil Organic Matter value, or derived from CLEA v1.071. The contaminant concentrations used for comparison with these criteria must also be justified. The report recommends a detailed ground gas risk assessment should be carried out. The Environment Agency should be consulted with respect to any risk to Controlled Waters.

8.6 Air Quality (ULP Policy ENV13):

The introduction of four dwellings at this edge of town centre location would not have any discernible effect on air quality management for the area under the AQMA.

UDC Conservation Officer 8.7 The application seeks permission to erect 4 no. detached dwellings, and garages

on a narrow plot of land to the north of Farmadine Grove within the historic town of Saffron Walden. The site, located to the east of the old railway bridge, was previously railway land with the tracks running through this plot and embankments on either side. The site is also located on the boundary of the Saffron Walden Conservation Area (Area 6), and the south western corner of the site does in fact fall within the designated heritage asset.

8.8 The character of this plot of land is very much ‘open’ in nature with a clear

association to the former railway line that occupied the site. This character and former use can still be readily interpreted today. The site therefore possesses historic, aesthetic and evidential value which contributes to the setting of the conservation area and informs our understanding as to how the area has developed historically and the context of the existing built development. The plot now serves as an area of important open space within this largely residential area, which is illustrative of the presence of the former railway line within the town.

8.9 Farmadine Grove is a private road which runs parallel to the plot in question, and

features residential development in the form of modest, semi-detached, two-storey dwellings primarily, dating from the C19th and C20th. These properties strongly relate to Farmadine Grove, fronting onto it.

Page 99

8.10 The proposed scheme seeks to erect 4 no. large, detached dwellings on this site, running in a linear pattern with their frontages facing towards the north. Having considered the scheme, I am concerned that the proposed dwellings are excessive in their scale and fail to relate positively to the historic pattern of development or the scale and form of the existing dwellings in the locality, particularly along Farmadine Grove. Their orientation facing away from the street would appear incongruous and at odds with the established pattern of development and character of the street and wider Conservation Area. Furthermore, I note that the ridge heights of the properties, despite the topography of the site, would be notably higher than the bridge itself, and therefore, the new dwellings would have a significant impact upon the character of the site, the conservation area and the existing dwellings.

8.11 Finally, the proposed materials for the dwellings are considered to be out of

character with the traditional and natural pallet of materials found elsewhere in the vicinity, and within the Conservation Area which include natural slate, handmade clay tiles and timber windows. Given the proximity of the development to the heritage asset and its position partly within it, the development would form a highly prominent element of the views into and out of the Conservation Area and it is felt that the quality of materials on any new development of this scale is paramount in preserving and enhancing the character and setting of the heritage asset.

8.12 To conclude, the development is not considered to preserve or enhance the

setting or character of the heritage asset, by reason of the form, scale, massing, orientation and materials proposed, and I have been unable to locate any reference or assessment of the significance of the Conservation Area and how this would be impacted by the scheme within the application. Therefore, the application is considered to be contrary to paragraphs 128 and 134 of the NPPF, 2012 and policy ENV1 of the ULP, 2005 and should therefore be refused.

9. REPRESENTATIONS 9.1 18 representations received (object). Neighbour notification period expired 22

August 2016. Advertisement expired 18 August 2016. Site notice expired 22 August 2016.

Summary of representations received as follows:

• Site should be protected as a green open space and should not be built on.

• Site as ecology value and development would remove natural habitats.

• Inappropriate form of development

• Site levels are such that the development would be visible to Farmadine Grove when slab levels and remediation work is taken into account and cause harm to residential amenity.

10. APPRAISAL The issues to consider in the determination of the application are: A Principle of development (NPPF, ULP Policies S1, H1 and SW2) B Whether access arrangements would be acceptable (ULP Policy GEN1) C Design (ULP Policies GEN2 and ENV1)

Page 100

D Parking (ULP Policy GEN8) E Impact of proposal on bio-diversity/protected species (ULP Policy GEN7) F Contaminated land / Air quality (ULP Policies 14 and 13) A Principle of development (NPPF, ULP Policies S1, H1 and SW2) 10.1 The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) has a presumption in favour of

sustainable development and encourages the re-use of previously developed land. The site comprises a rectangular strip of overgrown land onto the north-east side of South Road within development limits close to the town centre which has long since been redundant for its original land use purpose, namely that of the old railway line through the town. There is an argument to be made for its retention as a continued overgrown space to serve as a green buffer between the primary school on its northern side and Farmadine Grove on its southern side. However, the site does not form a Protected Open Space of Environmental Value (ULP Policy ENV3) within the currently adopted local plan where this has been allocated for the old railway line alignment on the northern side of Victoria Avenue further to the north-east of the site onto Thaxted Road. A short line of dwellings exist between this ENV allocation site and the site’s north-east boundary, whilst a larger concentration of dwellings (Braybrooke Close) have been built on the south-west side of South Road further along the old alignment line.

10.2 It is considered by reason of the site’s location, the brownfield status of the site

by reason of its previous use and the infilling of the line further long for housing that the submitted proposal represents a presumption in favour of sustainable development which would on balance make more appropriate use of the land by the provision of a small scale residential scheme which would contribute to the local housing supply. In the circumstances, it is considered that the principle of the residential development of the site is acceptable under the provisions of the NPPF and would accord with ULP Policies H1, S1 and SW2.

10.3 The site is situated within a Flood Zone 1 area as shown on the Environment

Agency flood risk map representing the lowest risk of flooding. A Flood Risk Assessment and Drainage Strategy dated January 2016 has been submitted with the application which has concluded through the completion of a Sequential Test that the proposed development would not pose an unacceptable flood risk either to the occupants of the site or to land off the site where the development would not increase flood risk elsewhere. No objections are therefore raised to the proposal under ULP Policy GEN3.

B Whether access arrangements would be acceptable (ULP Policy GEN1) 10.4 The proposed development would be served by a shared private drive which

would enter Farmadine Grove, a private unmade road, approximately 12m from its junction with South Road. At present, the forwardmost section of the site onto Farmadine Grove is enclosed by 2m high close-boarded fencing. It is understood that this was erected following a temporary access which was formed into the site to enable repairs to the adjacent bridge to be carried out. It has been contended by the applicant’s agent that an access point always existed at this point and that this can be established, although it is evident to the Council that this is not the case and that no access existed historically at this point, a view which has been expressed by some local residents. However, any further discussion concerning this issue is considered academic as the submitted scheme includes the provision of a new vehicular access point onto Farmadine Grove.

Page 101

10.5 The new access as shown would serve a small development of four new

dwellings which does not represent a large development scheme, whilst vehicle speeds are likely to be very low both along the shared private drive within the site, which would have a gradient from the floor of the site onto Farmadine Grove, and between the access point and along the short section of the private road to South Road. ECC Highways have not objected to the proposal on highway safety grounds because of the private nature of Farmadine Grove. The previous officer report for refused application UTT/16/0122/FUL cited highway reasons for refusal where the same development would amount to conflict between vehicles and existing pedestrian users along Farmadine Grove and where as a consequence the proposal would compromise road safety. However, whilst these reasons for refusal are noted, it is considered that it would be difficult to sustain these reasons for refusal on appeal under ULP Policy GEN1 in the absence of any formal highway objections. As such, the proposal is considered not to be contrary to ULP Policy GEN1 and is acceptable on highway safety grounds.

10.6 It should be noted that approved planning application UTT/16/1177/DFO for the

redevelopment of a small builder’s yard situated opposite the site in Farmadine Grove on its south side for housing purposes comprising 2 No. dwellings where 4 no. on-street parking spaces along Farmadine Grove were allocated for the development in front of the yard would not be compromised by the proposed development should this opposite approved development be implemented where some concerns have been expressed by residents in this regard as the allocated on-street spaces would be situated further down the private road to where the vehicular access point for the proposed development is shown.

C Design (ULP Policies GEN2 and ENV1) 10.7 The presented scheme shows four dwellings of similar size, height and design,

three of which would stand in a line and the fourth which would stand at the end of the shared access road at right angles The scheme would not because of the number of dwellings proposed amount to overdevelopment of the site having a low site density. The design of the dwellings would echo the local vernacular and it is noted that there is variety of house types within the immediate area ranging from older housing stock to more modern dwellings. The proposal is therefore considered acceptable in terms of design.

10.8 The comments from the Council’s Conservation Officer relating to the impact of

the proposed development on the character and appearance of the conservation area are noted. However, it should be emphasised that only a very small proportion of the site is within the designated conservation area (south-west corner onto South Road) and it is considered from this that any impact of the development on the conservation area would be minimal and would cause less than significant harm. In the circumstances, it is the opinion of the author of this report that the proposal would not be contrary to ULP Policy ENV1 despite your conservation officer comments.

10.9 Rear garden amenity areas for the dwellings would be 112sqm for Plot 1 (4 bed),

102sqm for Plot 2 (4 bed), 112sqm for Plot 3 (4 bed) and 189sqm for Plot 4 (5 bed). As such, the indicated garden sizes would meet the minimum recommended rear garden sizes as set out in the Essex Design Guide and would comply with ULP Policy GEN2 in this respect.

Page 102

10.10 The dwellings for the proposed development would be set at a lower ground level than the dwellings which exist along Farmadine Grove as shown on the section plans submitted with the application. It is considered because of this that the development would not have a significant detrimental effect on the residential amenities of those properties which exist within Farmadine Grove where tree screening exists along the south-east boundary onto the road and where a separation distance of between 18m and 20m would exist between the rear of the dwellings for Plots 1, 2 and 3 to the dwellings behind in Farmadine Grove and as the nearest proposed dwelling to this road (Plot 4) would have a blank facing gable end). It is considered from this that no amenity objections can be reasonably raised to the proposal under ULP Policy GEN2 notwithstanding concerns raised by various local residents to this effect.

D Parking (ULP Policy GEN8) 10.11 Resident parking for the development would be in the form of garaged and

hardstanding spaces immediate to the sides/rear of the respective dwellings. An amended site layout drawing has been submitted showing that he parking arrangements would comply with both ECC parking standards and UDC parking standards in terms of garage/parking bay sizes and the number of parking spaces per dwelling (namely 3 No. spaces for each dwelling being 4 and 4+ bedroomed units). Visitor parking spaces are shown for the front of the site just below the site entrance which would exceed the 0.25 ratio required per dwelling. Indicated parking arrangements for the scheme would therefore comply with ULP Policy GEN8.

E Impact of proposal on bio-diversity/protected species (ULP Policy GEN7); 10.12 The site comprises undeveloped and overgrown land and consideration has to

be had of the likely impact of the proposed development upon local ecology. ECC Ecology have been consulted on the proposal who have commented that the introduction of housing development at the site is unlikely to have an impact on protected species based upon the previous ecology report prepared by the applicant’s ecology consultants providing that the recommendations of that report are adhered to, although have recommended informatives relating to breeding birds and reptiles (should reptiles be found). No objections are therefore raised under ULP Policy GEN7.

F Contaminated land / Air quality (ULP Policies 14 and 13). 10.13 The site as former railway land has been identified by the environmental report

submitted by the applicant to contain various levels of contamination associated with the previously abandoned railway line land use. Environmental Health has been consulted on the application who have not raised any environmental objections to the proposal based upon the report findings subject to recommended conditions relating to contamination and remediation being imposed. The proposal would therefore comply with ULP Policy ENV14 subject to these recommended conditions being placed on any planning permission granted.

10.14 Environmental Health has not raised any specific concerns relating to air quality.

However, given that this is one of the Councillor call-in reasons for the current application, the EHO has been additionally consulted on this issue. However, she has commented that any impact on air quality arising from the development would be negligible given that it represents a scheme of just four dwellings and

Page 103

has not raised any concerns in this respect. No objections are therefore raised under ULP Policy ENV13.

11. CONCLUSION The following is a summary of the main reasons for the recommendation: A The use of this former brownfield site for residential purposes which is not zoned

as a Protected Open Space of Environmental Value would on balance make more efficient use of the land which would contribute to the Council’s housing supply and which would represent a presumption in favour of sustainable development at this edge of town centre location (NPPF and ULP Policies S1, H1 and SW2). The site has been assessed as not being susceptible to flood risk (ULP Policy GEN3).

B Access arrangements would be acceptable where it is considered that the development would not constitute a risk to highway safety or lead to a conflict between motorists and other road users of Farmadine Grove (ULP Policy GEN1).

C The proposal is considered acceptable in terms of site layout, dwelling design and impact on residential amenity (ULP Policy GEN2) and would not lead to significant harm to the character and appearance of the adjacent conservation area (ULP Policy ENV1).

D Parking arrangements for the development would be acceptable (ULP Policy GEN8).

E The proposal would not have a harmful effect on bio-diversity or protected species (ULP Policy GEN7).

F Historical contamination associated with the site can be remediated through appropriate conditions (ULP Policy ENV14). The proposal would have a negligible impact on air quality (ULP Policy ENV13).

RECOMMENDATION – APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS Conditions 1. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three

years from the date of this permission. REASON: In order to comply with Section 91 (1) and (2) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended).

2. Prior to commencement of development (with the exception of footings and

foundations) full details of both hard and soft landscape works shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. Subsequently, these works shall be carried out as approved. The landscaping details to be submitted shall include:- a) proposed finished/slab levels b) means of enclosure c) car parking layout d) vehicle and pedestrian access and circulation areas e) hard surfacing, other hard landscape features and materials f) existing trees, hedges or other soft features to be retained g) planting plans, including specifications of species, sizes, planting centres, number and percentage mix h) details of planting or features to be provided to enhance the value of the

Page 104

development for biodiversity and wildlife i) details of siting and timing of all construction activities to avoid harm to all nature conservation features j) location of service runs k) management and maintenance details REASON: The landscaping of this site is required in order to protect and enhance the existing visual character of the area and to reduce the visual and environmental impacts of the development hereby permitted in accordance with ULP Policies GEN2, GEN7 and ENV3 of the Uttlesford Local Plan (adopted 2005).

3. All hard and soft landscape works shall be carried out in accordance with the

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

REASON: To ensure proper implementation of the agreed landscape details in the interest of the amenity value of the development in accordance with ULP Policies GEN2 and ENV3 of the Uttlesford Local Plan (adopted 2005).

4. Prior to commencement of development, samples of materials to be used in the

construction of the external surfaces of the development hereby permitted shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The development shall be implemented using the approved materials. Subsequently, the approved materials shall not be changed without the prior written consent of the local planning authority. REASON: To ensure a satisfactory standard of development in the interests of visual amenity in accordance with ULP Policies GEN2 and ENV1 of the Uttlesford Local Plan (adopted 2005).

5. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General

Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any Order revoking or re-enacting that Order with or without modification), no development within Classes A to F of Part 1 of Schedule 2 and Class A of Part 2 of Schedule 2 of the Order shall take place without the prior written permission of the local planning authority. REASON: To prevent the site becoming overdeveloped and in the interests of the amenity of the occupiers of adjoining dwellings in accordance with ULP Policy GEN2 of the Uttlesford Local Plan (adopted 2005).

6. All of the dwellings approved by this permission shall be built to Category 2:

Accessible and adaptable dwellings M4(2) of the Building Regulations 2010 Approved Document M, Volume 1 2015 edition. REASON: To ensure compliance with ULP Policy GEN2 (c) of the Uttlesford Local Plan 2005 and the subsequent SPD on Accessible Homes and Playspace.

Page 105

7. Prior to commencement of development, details of the location and design of the

refuse bin and recycling materials storage areas and collection points shall be submitted to and approved by the local planning authority. This should include provision for the storage of three standard sized wheeled bins for each new property with a collection point no further than 25 metres from the public highway. Where the refuse collection vehicle is required to go onto any road that road shall be constructed to take a load of 26 tonnes. The refuse storage and collection facilities and vehicular access where required shall be provided prior to the first occupation of the units to which they relate and shall be retained in the approved form thereafter. REASON: To meet the District Council requirements for recycling, to prevent the unsightly storage of refuse containers and in the interests of amenity and sustainability in accordance with ULP Policy GEN2 of the Uttlesford Local Plan (adopted 2005).

8. All vehicular hardstandings provided shall be a minimum of 5.5m.x 2.9m and all

garages shall be a minimum of 7.0m x 3.0m.. REASON: To ensure a satisfactory standard of parking for the development in accordance with ULP Policy GEN8 of the Uttlesford Local Plan (adopted 2005).

9. The area set aside for resident and visitor parking as shown on the submitted/

approved drawings shall be laid out and surfaced before the dwellings hereby permitted are first occupied and shall be retained permanently thereafter for the vehicle parking of residents/visitors and shall not be used for any other purpose. REASON: To ensure a satisfactory standard of parking for the development in accordance with ULP Policy GEN8 of the Uttlesford Local Plan (adopted 2005).

10. The access into the site shall be laid to a gradient not exceeding 4% for the first

6.0m and 8% thereafter before meeting level ground. REASON: In the interests of highway safety in accordance with ULP Policy GEN1 of the Uttlesford Local Plan (adopted 2005).

11. All ecology recommendations contained within the report entitled “Land off

Farmadine Grove / Saffron Walden / Essex (Green Environmental Consultants, December 2015”) shall be adhered to, including those for bio-diversity enhancements. REASON: To provide the opportunity for increased bio-diversity value and habitats for the site in accordance with ULP Policy GEN7 of the Uttlesford Local Plan (adopted 2005).

12. No development other than that required to be carried out as part of an approved

scheme of remediation shall take place until an assessment of the nature and extent of contamination has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. This assessment must be undertaken by a competent person, and shall assess any contamination on the site, including ground gas, whether or not it originates on the site. It must include: (i) a survey of the extent, scale and nature of contamination; (ii) an assessment of the potential risks to human health, groundwaters and surface waters,

Page 106

(iii) an appraisal of remedial options and proposal of the preferred option(s). This must be conducted in accordance with DEFRA and the Environment Agency's "Model Procedures for the Management of Land Contamination, CLR11". REASON: In the interests of safety, residential amenity and proper planning of the area, in accordance with ULP Policies GEN2, GEN4 and ENV14 of the Uttlesford Local Plan (adopted 2005).

13. No development shall take place until a detailed remediation scheme to bring the

site to a condition suitable for the intended use by removing unacceptable risks to human health has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme must include all works to be undertaken, proposed remediation objectives and remediation criteria, and a timetable of works and site management procedures. The scheme must ensure that the site will not qualify as contaminated land under Part 2A of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 in relation to the intended use of the land after remediation. REASON: In the interests of safety, residential amenity and proper planning of the area in accordance with ULP Policies GEN2, GEN4 and ENV14 of the Uttlesford Local Plan (adopted 2005).

14. The remediation scheme shall be implemented in accordance with the approved

timetable of works prior to the commencement of development (other than that required to carry out the remediation) unless otherwise agreed by the local planning authority. Within 2 months of the completion of measures identified in the approved remediation scheme, a validation report (that demonstrates the effectiveness of the remediation carried out) must be submitted to the Local Planning Authority. REASON: In the interests of safety, residential amenity and proper planning of the area, in accordance with ULP Policies GEN2, GEN4 and ENV14 of the Uttlesford Local Plan (adopted 2005).

15. In the event that contamination is found at any time when carrying out the

approved development that was not previously identified, it must be reported immediately to the Local Planning Authority and work halted on the part of the site affected by the unexpected contamination. An assessment must be undertaken in accordance with the requirements of condition 12 above, and where remediation is necessary a remediation scheme, together with a timetable for its implementation, must be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority in accordance with the requirements of condition 13 above. The measures in the approved remediation scheme must then be implemented in accordance with the approved timetable. Following completion of measures identified in the approved remediation scheme a validation report must be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority in accordance with condition 14 above. REASON: In the interests of safety, residential amenity and proper planning of the area, in accordance with ULP Policies GEN2, GEN4 and ENV14 of the Uttlesford Local Plan (adopted 2005).

Page 107

Application no.: UTT/16/1997/FUL

Address: Land North Of, Farmadine Grove, Saffron Walden

© Crown copyright and database rights 2016 Ordnance Survey 0100018688

Organisation: Uttlesford District Council

Department: Planning

Date: 02 November 2016

Page 108

UTT/16/2149/FUL (FELSTED)

(MAJOR)

PROPOSAL: Residential development comprising 22 no. dwellings and associated garages, roads, parking, open space and part demolition of existing buildings (revised scheme to that approved under planning permission UTT/15/0726/FUL)

LOCATION: Former Ridleys Brewery, Mill Lane, Hartford End CM3 1JZ APPLICANT: Stockplace Hartford Ltd AGENT: Philip J Conway EXPIRY DATE: 23 November 2016 CASE OFFICER: Luke Mills

1. NOTATION 1.1 Countryside. 2. DESCRIPTION OF SITE 2.1 The application site is located off Chelmsford Road, to the south of Hartford End.

Until recently, it accommodated a number of industrial buildings with a combined footprint of approximately 5350 sq. m. Most of these buildings have been demolished in accordance with the planning permission granted in January 2016 (UTT/15/0726/FUL).

3. PROPOSAL 3.1 The application is for planning permission to demolish all buildings, with the

exception of the south-eastern corner of the original brewery building, and to erect eight flats (incorporating the retained building) and 14 houses. The development also includes associated garages, roads, parking and open space.

A schedule of accommodation is contained in Appendix A of this report. 4. APPLICANT’S CASE 4.1 The applicant’s case is presented in the submitted Planning and Design Statement,

in which it is suggested that the proposed amendments to the approved development would improve the mix of housing and ensure compliance with the Building Regulations.

5. RELEVANT SITE HISTORY 5.1 In October 2009, outline planning permission was granted for a wellbeing village

comprising 34 care home rooms, 50 assisted living apartments, 3 guest bedrooms, warden’s flat, restaurant and shopping and recreational facilities (UTT/0645/09/OP).

5.2 In February 2012, planning permission was granted for a mixed use development

Page 109

comprising 36 apartments, 7 houses and offices (UTT/2310/10/FUL). 5.3 In January 2016, planning permission was granted for a 22-dwelling development

similar to that now proposed (UTT/15/0726/FUL). The permission has since been implemented. The current application represents an amendment to the approved development, and includes the following main differences:

• Reduction in the number of flats from nine to eight

• Replacement of a detached chalet bungalow with two semi-detached houses

• Minor alterations to designs to achieve compliance with the accessibility standards in the Building Regulations

• The substation has been relocated

• Heating will be provided by centralised LPG, rather than biomass

• Solar photovoltaic panels have been added 6. POLICIES

- National Planning Policy Framework

6.1 S70 of The Town and Country Planning Act 1990 requires the local planning

authority, in dealing with a planning application, to have regard to the provisions of the development plan, so far as material to the application, and to any other material considerations.

6.2 S38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 requires that, if regard is

to be had to the development plan for the purpose of any determination to be made under the planning Acts, the determination must be made in accordance with the plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise.

6.3 Uttlesford District Local Plan 2005

- S7 – The Countryside - GEN1 – Access - GEN2 – Design - GEN3 – Flood Protection - GEN6 – Infrastructure Provision to Support Development - GEN7 – Nature Conservation - GEN8 – Vehicle Parking Standards - ENV2 – Development affecting Listed Buildings - ENV3 – Open Spaces and Trees - ENV4 – Ancient Monuments and Sites of Archaeological Importance - ENV5 – Protection of Agricultural Land - ENV12 – Protection of Water Resources - ENV14 – Contaminated Land - H1 – Housing Development - H9 – Affordable Housing - H10 – Housing Mix

6.4 The following documents are relevant to the interpretation of the above policies:

- SPD Accessible Homes and Playspace - Parking Standards: Design and Good Practice - Local Residential Parking Standards - The Essex Design Guide

Page 110

- Developer Contributions Guidance Document National Policies 6.5 The following paragraphs of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) are

relevant to the determination of this application: - 14 – Presumption in favour of sustainable development - 17 – Core planning principles - 32 – Promoting sustainable transport - 34 – Promoting sustainable transport - 39 – Promoting sustainable transport - 50 – Delivering a wide choice of high quality homes - 55 – Delivering a wide choice of high quality homes - 58 – Requiring good design - 69 – Promoting healthy communities - 101-103 – Meeting the challenge of climate change, flooding and coastal

change - 111 – Conserving and enhancing the natural environment - 112 – Conserving and enhancing the natural environment - 118 – Conserving and enhancing the natural environment - 120-122 – Conserving and enhancing the natural environment - 131-135 – Conserving and enhancing the historic environment

6.6 The following national policies and guidance are also relevant:

- Planning Practice Guidance (PPG) - House of Commons Written Statement 161 (HCWS161): Sustainable drainage

systems - House of Commons Written Statement 488 (HCWS488): Planning update

Other Material Considerations 6.7 - Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA)

- Felsted Parish Plan 7. PARISH COUNCIL COMMENTS 7.1 “The PC has no concern about the design changes, but questions the choice of LPG

heating in place of the previously specified biomass.” 8. CONSULTATIONS Historic Environment Officer (Essex County Council) 8.1 No objections. Extract:

“All of the archaeological work required on this site has been completed and therefore no archaeological conditions are being recommended.”

Natural England 8.2 No objections. Lead Local Flood Authority (Essex County Council)

Page 111

8.3 Objection. The submitted flood risk assessment does not meet the requirements of

the County Council’s detailed drainage checklist. Highway Authority (Essex County Council) 8.4 No objections, subject to conditions. Stansted Airport 8.5 No objections. Environment Agency 8.6 Objection. The new climate change allowances are not reflected in the submitted

flood risk assessment. Ecological Consultant (Place Services) 8.7 No objections, subject to conditions. Anglian Water 8.8 No comments received. No objections were raised to the previous application

(UTT/15/0726/FUL). Education Authority (Essex County Council) 8.9 The development should make the following financial contributions (index linked to

April 2016):

• £67,810 to mitigate the impact on local primary school provision

• £65,990.61 towards primary school transport provision

• £15,606.60 towards secondary school transport provision 9. REPRESENTATIONS 9.1 Neighbours were notified of the application by letter and a notice was displayed near

the site. One representation has been received, in which concerns are raised regarding the impact on road safety, pollution and noise associated with an increase in the number of vehicle movements.

10. APPRAISAL The issues to consider in the determination of the application are: A Location of housing (S7, H1 & 55) B Character and appearance (S7, GEN2, ENV3, 17 & 58) C Sustainable transport (GEN1, 34 & 55) D Road safety (GEN1 & 32) E Accessibility (GEN2 & PPG) F Amenity (GEN2 & 17) G Public open space (GEN2 & 69) I Flood risk (GEN3 & 101-103) J Infrastructure (GEN6)

Page 112

K Biodiversity (GEN7 & 118) L Parking (GEN8, 39 & HCWS488) M Setting of listed buildings (ENV2 & 131-134) N Archaeology (ENV4 & 131-135) O Agricultural land (ENV5 & 112) P Pollution of water (ENV12 & 120-122) Q Contaminated land (ENV14 & 120-122) R Affordable housing (H9, 50 & PPG) S Housing mix (H10, 50 & SHMA) T Previously developed land (111) U Sustainable drainage (HCWS161) A Location of housing (S7, H1 & 55) 10.1 The application site mostly comprises previously developed land, located beyond

the Development Limits defined in the Local Plan. While Policy H1 permits the re-use of previously developed land for housing on a general level, Policy S7 and the associated Development Limits are clearly intended to restrict development in the countryside to that which requires such a location or is appropriate to a rural area. Housing does not satisfy either of these criteria so the erection of new dwellings on the site would be in conflict with the spatial strategy of the Local Plan.

10.2 The NPPF takes a slightly different approach to rural housing. Paragraph 55

provides support for the growth of existing settlements, and seeks to avoid new isolated homes in the countryside unless there are special circumstances. Taking into account the PPG, it is considered that the intent of this policy is to focus new housing development within and on the edge of existing settlements, thereby preventing sporadic development in the countryside.

10.3 The distant location of the nearest settlement with services and facilities ensures

that the site is ‘isolated’ for the purposes of paragraph 55. It is therefore necessary to consider whether any of the special circumstances apply, one of which is development which would represent the optimal viable use of a heritage asset or would be appropriate enabling development to secure the future of heritage assets.

10.4 The original brewery building, in the south-east corner of the site, is considered a

non-designated heritage asset. It was built in 1842 and was operational for over 160 years, forming a locally distinctive feature which forms an important part of the development of the landscape. As demonstrated by the viability evidence, the site presents financial difficulties in terms of bringing forward redevelopment. It is therefore considered that the proposal offers a scheme that could secure the future of the heritage asset by retaining the prominent and distinctive south-eastern corner and rebuilding the remainder of the historic brewery building with a similar façade. While much of the building would be new, it would continue to reference the historic use of the site and its importance in the local landscape.

10.5 The proposal does not accord with the locational requirements in the Local Plan, but

it does accord with the requirements of the NPPF because special circumstances justify the isolated location.

B Character and appearance (S7, GEN2, ENV3, 17 & 58) 10.6 The site has an industrial appearance and is immediately surrounded by open

countryside, with the exception of Park Cottages on the opposite side of Chelmsford Road. The proposal would primarily re-use the developed land, although it would

Page 113

also encroach onto the surrounding agricultural land. 10.7 The buildings would be more evenly distributed across the site when compared with

the existing concentration towards the south and east. However, this would not have a detrimental impact on the appearance of the site in long distance views, particularly because the landmark brewery building on the corner of Chelmsford Road and Mill Lane would be preserved or reinstated. With suitable landscaping, the overall appearance of the site would remain as a cluster of buildings in a rural setting. The spaciousness of the development and the green spaces associated with the open space and sustainable drainage system would ensure compatibility with the rural landscape.

10.8 Nearby housing comprises detached and semi-detached family housing with a

variety of design approaches, although most buildings are finished in brick and chimneys are common features. It is considered that the proposed housing would appear compatible with the character of the area. The buildings in the south-east part of the site would respect the industrial heritage of the site, and the remainder of the buildings would generally follow the design principles set out in ‘The Essex Design Guide’. External walls would be finished in brick and render, and roofs in slates and clay tiles. Samples could be secured using a condition.

10.9 The submitted Arboricultural Implications Assessment identifies that a number of

trees would need to be removed to facilitate the development. These would generally be of low to poor amenity value, although one is the subject of a Tree Preservation Order – that identified in the report as T7 (Horse Chestnut). The removal of this tree was authorised when dealing with the approval of details reserved by a condition of the previous planning permission, under application number UTT/16/0350/DOC. Another protected tree, T14 (Turkey Oak), could be protected using a condition that secures compliance with the approved details under UTT/16/0350/DOC. Overall, it is considered that the important environmental features on the site would be retained.

10.10 Taking into account the above assessment, it is considered that the proposal

accords with policies S7, GEN2 and ENV3, and paragraphs 17 and 58 of the NPPF with respect to character and appearance.

C Sustainable transport (GEN1, 34 & 55) 10.11 Policy GEN1 states that development will only be permitted if it encourages

movement by means other than driving a car. The site is not in a town or village with services and facilities so occupants would need to travel. Walking is not a realistic option given the lack of street-lit paths over the distance of approximately 3.15 km (1.95 miles) to the centre of Felsted. Cycling is possible, although the lack of any cycle paths ensures that this is unlikely to account for the majority of journeys. Furthermore, Felsted would be the only realistic destination so cycling is unlikely to provide an option for travelling to work in the larger settlements, such as Great Dunmow, Braintree and Chelmsford. Bus stops approximately 350 m to the north of the site provide access to a limited service (Hedingham No.16), which includes Felsted and Chelmsford as destinations. The most likely mode of transport is the car, in conflict with Policy GEN1.

10.12 Paragraph 34 of the NPPF states that plans and decisions should ensure

developments that generate significant movement are located where the need to travel will be minimised and the use of sustainable transport modes can be maximised. It recognises the need to take account of other policies in the NPPF,

Page 114

particularly in rural areas. While the proposal would not successfully minimise the need to travel and maximise the use of sustainable transport modes, account should also be taken of the above assessment in relation to paragraph 55, which relates to housing in rural areas.

D Road safety (GEN1 & 32) 10.13 Policy GEN1 states that development will only be permitted if access to the main

road network is capable of carrying the traffic generated by the development safely, and if its design would not compromise road safety and would take account of the needs of all road users. Taking into account the comments of the Highway Authority, it is considered that the proposal would comply with this policy provided that appropriate conditions would be used.

E Accessibility (GEN2 & PPG) 10.14 Policy GEN2 and the SPD entitled 'Accessible Homes and Playspace' indicate that

the proposed dwelling should meet the Lifetime Homes standards on accessibility. However, the PPG explains that enhanced accessibility should be sought only by reference to Requirement M4(2) and/or M4(3) of the optional requirements in the Building Regulations. Taking into account the objectives of the SPD, it is considered that it would be appropriate to use a planning condition to require one dwelling (5% of the total) to comply with Requirement M4(3)(2)(a) (Wheelchair user dwellings) and the remainder to comply with Requirement M4(2) (Accessible and adaptable dwellings).

F Amenity (GEN2 & 17) 10.15 The Essex Design Guide includes guidance on the provision of private amenity

space. The schedule of accommodation in Appendix A of this report shows that the proposal broadly complies with the minimum garden size standards. At 85 sq m and 45 sq m, the gardens serving Plots 1 and 18 would be sufficiently close to the minimum standards to ensure that an appropriate amount of amenity space would be provided for the occupants.

10.16 Policy GEN2 states that development will not be permitted unless it would avoid

materially adverse impacts on the reasonable occupation and enjoyment of a residential property. The policy is supplemented by ‘The Essex Design Guide’, which includes guidance on issues such as loss of privacy and loss of daylight. The proposed development has been designed to successfully avoid these adverse effects on living conditions.

G Public open space (GEN2 & 69) 10.17 Based on a population of approximately 95 people, the Developer Contributions

Guidance Document requires the provision of 190 sq m of children’s play space and 760 sq m of amenity greenspace. As the requirement for children’s play space is not sufficient to justify the provision of play equipment, it is considered that the proposed grouping of public open spaces in a total area far exceeding the minimum standard would be appropriate.

I Flood risk (GEN3 & 101-103) 10.18 Policy GEN3 states that buildings will not be permitted in the functional floodplain

unless there is an exceptional need. The proposed development would straddle

Page 115

Flood Zones 1, 2, 3a and 3b, the latter being regarded as the functional floodplain. No evidence has been provided to demonstrate that there is an exceptional need for development to take place on the site. The proposal therefore breaches this policy.

10.19 Paragraph 101 of the NPPF describes the Sequential Test, the aim of which is to

steer new development to areas with the lowest probability of flooding. As the application site includes land within Flood Zones 2 and 3, the policy indicates that evidence should be submitted to demonstrate that the development could not be located in Flood Zone 1. However, the Sequential Test is not necessary for changes of use only, or for alterations which do not increase floorspace. Therefore, the proposed change to residential use should have no bearing on the need for a Sequential Test, and the replacement of the existing buildings in Flood Zones 2 and 3 with buildings of a smaller overall size should also not necessitate the test.

10.20 In accordance with paragraph 103 of the NPPF, a flood risk assessment has been

submitted with the application. The Environment Agency has raised an objection on the grounds that the flood defence wall proposed by the applicant does not incorporate new climate change allowances, which were not applicable to the previous planning permission. As the previous permission represents a realistic fallback position for the applicant, it is considered that the flood risk requirements for the proposed development should remain the same.

J Infrastructure (GEN6) 10.21 Policy GEN6 states that development will not be permitted unless it makes

appropriate provision for infrastructure which it necessitates. The education authority, Essex County Council, has advised that the development should make a financial contribution of £149,407.21 towards primary school education.

10.22 An important material consideration is the extant planning permission for a similar

development on the site, which represents a likely fallback position and for which the necessary education contribution totalled £69,380. This payment has since been collected. It is therefore considered unreasonable to pursue further contributions, the need for which derives from a new policy of the education authority to seek assistance for school transport provision.

K Biodiversity (GEN7 & 118) 10.23 Information on biodiversity impacts is included in the submitted Ecology Reports and

Protected Mammals Survey. Taking into account the comments of the Ecological Consultant, it is considered that biodiversity impacts would be successfully mitigated and enhancements achieved. It is therefore unlikely that the proposal would cause harm to protected species or valuable habitats, such that there is no conflict with Policy GEN7 or paragraph 118 of the NPPF.

10.24 The Ecological Consultant recommends the use of a condition relating to works to

the western building, and the potential effect on bats. However, these works are outside the scope of this application, instead relating to a recent planning permission for development at 1-4 Mill Lane.

10.25 S40(1) of the Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006 requires local

planning authorities to have regard to the purpose of conserving biodiversity when exercising its functions. Also, R9(3) of the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 requires Local Planning Authorities to have regard to the requirements of the Habitats Directive and Birds Directive when exercising its

Page 116

functions. These statutory duties are reflected in the above assessment. L Parking (GEN8, 39 & HCWS488) 10.26 Policy GEN8 states that development will not be permitted unless the number,

design and layout of vehicle parking places are appropriate for the location. This policy is supplemented by 'Parking Standards: Design and Good Practice' and 'Local Residential Parking Standards', which set minimum parking standards to prevent on-street parking. The proposal complies with the minimum standards, as demonstrated in the schedule of accommodation at Appendix A of this report.

10.27 Paragraph 39 of the NPPF sets a number of criteria which should be applied when

setting local parking standards. Paragraph 39 is supplemented by ‘Planning Update: Written statement - HCWS488’, which states that local parking standards for residential and non-residential development should only be applied where there is clear and compelling justification that it is necessary to manage the local road network. Given the lack of available public transport options at the site, it is considered that the local minimum standards are applicable. Taking into account the above conclusion on Policy GEN8, it is considered that appropriate parking provision would be made.

M Setting of listed buildings (ENV2 & 131-134) 10.28 Policy ENV2 states that development will not be permitted if it would adversely

affect the setting of a listed building. At the western end of Mill Lane are the former Mill and Mill House buildings, which are Grade II* and Grade II listed respectively. The proposed development would cause no material harm to the setting of these buildings. There is a substantial separation distance between the site and the heritage assets, and the visual impact of the development at the proposed scale would not be significant.

N Archaeology (ENV4 & 131-135) 10.29 Policy ENV4 requires suitable assessment of archaeological remains before

development commences. Taking into account the comments of the Historic Environment Advisor, it is considered that all archaeological work required by the previous permission (UTT/15/0726/FUL) has been suitably carried out, such that no further investigation is required.

O Agricultural land (ENV5 & 112) 10.30 Policy ENV5 states that development will only be permitted on the best and most

versatile agricultural land where opportunities have been explored on previously developed land and within Development Limits. The Natural England Agricultural Land Classification Map indicates that the agricultural land affected by the development is predominantly classified as Grade 3, perhaps with some Grade 2. This is among the best and most versatile agricultural land. Nevertheless, it is considered that the amount of land affected is not significant in agricultural terms, at approximately 0.5 hectares, so limited weight may be given to the breach of policy.

10.31 Paragraph 112 of the NPPF states that local planning authorities should take into

account the economic and other benefits of the best and most versatile agricultural land. Where significant development of agricultural land is necessary, the use of poorer quality land should be sought in preference to that of a higher quality. Taking into account the above conclusion on Policy ENV5, it is considered that the proposal

Page 117

would cause limited harm from the loss of agricultural land because the area of land is not significant in agricultural terms.

P Pollution of water (ENV12 & 120-122) 10.32 Policy ENV12 states that development will not be permitted if it would be liable to

cause contamination of groundwater or surface water, unless effective safeguards are provided. Taking into account the comments of the Environment Agency on the previous application, it is considered that any potential contamination risks could be suitably addressed using appropriate conditions.

Q Contaminated land (ENV14 & 120-122) 10.33 Policy ENV14 requires appropriate investigation where it is known or strongly

suspected that a site is contaminated. Taking into account the comments of the Environment Agency on the previous application, it is considered that any potential contamination risks could be suitably addressed using appropriate conditions.

R Affordable housing (H9, 50 & PPG) 10.34 Policy H9 states that the Council will seek to negotiate on a site by site basis an

element of affordable housing of 40% of the total provision of housing on appropriate allocated and windfall sites, having regard to the date Housing Needs Survey, market and site considerations. However, the Developer Contributions Guidance Document confirms that provision will not be sought if it can be evidenced that the requirement would render the development unviable.

10.35 The previous planning permission was granted with a requirement to pay £222,678

towards affordable housing provisions. This figure was calculated on the basis of a Viability Assessment submitted by the applicant, which was reviewed by an independent consultant.

10.36 A similar viability review has taken place regarding the current proposal, with the

Council-appointed consultant concluding that the development could make an additional contribution of £40,000. This could be secured using a S106 agreement.

S Housing mix (H10, 50 & SHMA) 10.37 Policy H10 states that developments on sites of 0.1 hectares and above, or of three

or more dwellings, must provide a significant proportion of market housing comprising small properties. Small properties are those with two or three bedrooms. The proposal includes 10 small properties, which at 45% of the total is considered a significant proportion.

10.38 The SHMA contains the most up-to-date assessment of the housing needs in the

District, and indicates that there is still a high demand for small properties. With this in mind, it is considered that the above requirement is justified.

T Previously developed land (111) 10.39 Paragraph 111 of the NPPF states that plans and decisions should encourage the

effective use of land by re-using land that has been previously developed, provided that it is not of high environmental value. The proposal would mainly use previously developed land so it gains support from this policy.

Page 118

U Sustainable drainage (HCWS161) 10.40 House of Commons: Written Statement (HCWS161) requires decisions on planning

applications relating to major development to ensure that sustainable drainage systems for the management of run-off are put in place, unless demonstrated to be inappropriate. The Lead Local Flood Authority has raised an objection to the proposal on the basis that the submitted flood risk assessment does not comply with its detailed drainage checklist. However, it supported the previous application, which included the same document. Taking into account the realistic fallback position of implementing the extant permission, it is considered appropriate to require the current proposal to meet the same requirements for drainage.

11. CONCLUSION The following is a summary of the main reasons for the recommendation: A The proposal conflicts with the spatial strategy for new housing in the development

plan, and breaches Policy GEN1 due to a lack of sustainable transport opportunities.

B The proposal accords with the NPPF as a whole and, in particular, its policies on the

location of rural housing and access to sustainable transport in rural areas. C Taking into account the more up-to-date policies of the NPPF compared with the

Local Plan, it is considered that the conflict with the development plan is outweighed in this instance. No other material considerations indicate that planning permission should be refused so it is considered that permission should be granted.

RECOMMENDATION – CONDITIONAL APPROVAL SUBJECT TO S106 LEGAL AGREEMENT: (I) The applicant be informed that the Planning Committee would be minded to

refuse planning permission for the reasons set out in paragraph (III) unless the freeholder owner enters into a binding obligation to cover the matters set out below under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, as amended by the Planning and Compensation Act 1991, in a form to be prepared by the Interim Head of Legal Services, in which case he shall be authorised to conclude such an obligation to secure the following:

(i) Financial contribution of £40,000 towards affordable housing provision, in addition to the £222,678 required in connection with application UTT/15/0726/FUL (ii) Payment of the Council's reasonable legal costs

(II) In the event of such an obligation being made, the Assistant Director -

Planning shall be authorised to grant permission subject to the conditions set out below

(III) If the freehold owner shall fail to enter into such an obligation by 18 November

2016 the Assistant Director - Planning shall be authorised to refuse permission in his discretion anytime thereafter for the following reasons:

(i) Lack of financial contribution towards affordable housing provision

Conditions

Page 119

1. The development hereby permitted must be begun before the expiration of 3 years

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

2. Within six months of the date of this permission, details of the external finishes

(including samples and/or photographs as appropriate) must be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development must be carried out in accordance with the approved details. REASON: To ensure compatibility with the character of the area, in accordance with Policy S7 and Policy GEN2 of the Uttlesford Local Plan (adopted 2005).

3. All hard and soft landscape works must be carried out in accordance with the

following submitted details prior to occupation of any dwelling: - Drawing 15-043/308 T2 - Drawing 15-043/309 T2 - NC15.206-P202 B - Coping detail to flood wall All planting, seeding or turfing and soil preparation comprised in the above details of landscaping must be carried out in the first planting and seeding seasons following the occupation of the buildings, the completion of the development, or in agreed phases whichever is the sooner, and any plants which within a period of five years from the completion of the development die, are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased must be replaced in the next planting season with others of similar size and species, unless the local planning authority gives written consent to any variation. All landscape works must be carried out in accordance with the guidance contained in British Standards, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority. REASON: To ensure compatibility with the character of the area and to ensure appropriate provision is made for open space and play space, in accordance with Policy S7 and Policy GEN2 of the Uttlesford Local Plan (adopted 2005).

4. The development must be carried out in accordance with the following submitted

details: - Arboricultural Method Statement DFCP 3286 - Tree Protection Plan DFCP3286 TPP Rev A REASON: To ensure compatibility with the character of the area by retaining trees which are protected for their amenity value, in accordance with Policy S7 and Policy GEN2 of the Uttlesford Local Plan (adopted 2005).

5. One dwelling must be built in accordance with Requirement M4(3)(2)(a) (Wheelchair

user dwellings) of the Building Regulations 2010 Approved Document M, Volume 1 2015 edition. The remaining dwellings must be built in accordance with Requirement M4(2) (Accessible and adaptable dwellings) of the Building Regulations 2010 Approved Document M, Volume 1 2015 edition.

Page 120

REASON: To ensure a high standard of accessibility, in accordance with Policy GEN2 of the Uttlesford Local Plan (adopted 2005) and the Planning Practice Guidance.

6. The development must be carried out in accordance with the submitted Construction

Method Statement. REASON: In the interests of highway safety, in accordance with Policy GEN1 of the Uttlesford Local Plan (adopted 2005).

7. The access as shown on Drawing No. HEB 01 g (Proposed site plan. Amended

layout), dated 26/07/2016, must be constructed to adoptable standards, to include a 2 metre wide footway across the site frontage and visibility splays of 160m by 2.4m by 90m at the northern access, and must be kept clear of any obstruction at all times. REASON: In the interests of highway safety, in accordance with Policy GEN1 of the Uttlesford Local Plan (adopted 2005).

8. The existing central access must be permanently closed incorporating the

reinstatement to full height of the highway verge/kerbing, immediately the proposed new access is brought into use. REASON: In the interests of highway safety, in accordance with Policy GEN1 of the Uttlesford Local Plan (adopted 2005).

9. Prior to the occupation of any dwelling, the vehicle parking area indicated on the

approved plans must be hard surfaced, sealed and marked out in parking bays. The vehicle parking area must be retained in this form at all times. REASON: In the interests of highway safety, in accordance with Policy GEN1 of the Uttlesford Local Plan (adopted 2005).

10. The finished ground floor levels of all buildings hereby permitted must be set no

lower than 38.40m AOD. REASON: To ensure the appropriate protection to the dwellings and occupants in the event of a flood, in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework.

11. Prior to the occupation of any dwelling, the flood wall must be constructed in

accordance with the following submitted details: - Drawing H1452/007/T1 - Flood wall Structural calculations (BRP Associates; Job No. H1452; January 2016) REASON: To ensure the appropriate protection to the dwellings and occupants in the event of a flood, in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework.

12. The associated compensatory storage scheme on land to the south of the

application site must be completed in accordance with the terms of planning permission 15/00583/FUL, granted by Chelmsford City Council, prior to the occupation of any dwelling. REASON: To ensure the proposed development does not increase flood risk elsewhere, in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework.

Page 121

13. Prior to occupation of any dwelling, a verification report demonstrating completion of

works set out in the approved remediation strategy and the effectiveness of the remediation must be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The report must include results of sampling and monitoring carried out in accordance with the approved verification plan to demonstrate that the site remediation criteria have been met. It must also include any plan (a "long-term monitoring and maintenance plan") for longer-term monitoring of pollutant linkages, maintenance and arrangements for contingency action, as identified in the verification plan. The long-term monitoring and maintenance plan must be implemented as approved. REASON: To protect, and prevent the pollution of, controlled waters (particularly the Secondary A aquifer, nearby groundwater abstraction and River Chelmer) from potential pollutants associated with current and previous land uses, in accordance with National Planning Policy Framework.

14. The development must be carried out in accordance with the following submitted

details: - Phase 2 Additional Site Investigation Report, Report No. 10126-R01 Issue 2, dated October 2015 - Remediation Method Statement, Report No. 10126-R02 Issue 6, dated April 2016 - Letter from Sue Slaven, Ref: P0003/L01, dated 17 May 2016 Any necessary contingency measures must be carried out in accordance with the details in the approved reports. On completion of the monitoring specified in the plan a final report demonstrating that all long-term remediation works have been carried out and confirming that remedial targets have been achieved must be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. REASON: To protect, and prevent the pollution of, controlled waters (particularly the Secondary A aquifer, nearby groundwater abstraction and River Chelmer) from potential pollutants associated with current and previous land uses, in accordance with National Planning Policy Framework.

15. If, during development, contamination not previously identified is found to be present

at the site, no further development (unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority) shall be carried out until a remediation strategy detailing how this unsuspected contamination shall be dealt with has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The remediation strategy shall be implemented as approved. REASON: To protect, and prevent the pollution of, controlled waters (particularly the Secondary A aquifer, nearby groundwater abstraction and River Chelmer) from potential pollutants associated with current and previous land uses, in accordance with National Planning Policy Framework.

16. The development must be carried out in accordance with the approved Flood Risk

Assessment (May 2015, 1279/RE/06-14/01 REVISION E produced by Evans Rivers and Coastal) and the following mitigation measures detailed within the FRA: - Limiting the discharge from the site to 2 l/s except in fluvial flooding conditions when runoff will be limited to 10.05 l/s during a 1 in 1, 26.75 l/s during a 1 in 30 and 38.49 during the 1 in 100 year event.

Page 122

- Provide attenuation storage (including locations on layout plan) for all storm events up to and including the 1:100 year storm event inclusive of climate change. The mitigation measures must be fully implemented prior to occupation of any dwelling and subsequently in accordance with the timing/phasing arrangements embodied within the scheme, or within any other period as may subsequently be agreed, in writing, by the Local Planning Authority. REASON: To prevent surface water flooding and to ensure the effective operation of the sustainable drainage system over the lifetime of the development, in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework and House of Commons: Written Statement (HCWS161) – Sustainable drainage systems.

17. The development must be carried out in accordance with the following submitted

details: - Methodology To Reduce and Manage Off-Site Flooding During Construction Works Rev A REASON: To mitigate against increased flood risk to the surrounding area during construction therefore, in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework.

Prior to occupation of the development, a detailed Maintenance Plan for the surface

water drainage scheme must be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The surface water drainage scheme must thereafter be maintained in accordance with the approved Plan. REASON: To ensure the long-term effectiveness of the surface water drainage scheme, in accordance with House of Commons Written Statement 161: Sustainable drainage systems and the National Planning Policy Framework.

18. The development must be carried out in accordance with the submitted

‘Construction Environmental Management Plan: Biodiversity’, prepared by Greenlight Environmental Consultancy and dated 4 January 2016. REASON: To make appropriate provision for conserving and enhancing the natural environment within the approved development, in accordance with Policy GEN7 of the Uttlesford Local Plan (adopted 2005) and the National Planning Policy Framework.

Page 123

APPENDIX A – SCHEDULE OF ACCOMMODATION

Plot Bedrooms Parking (min.)

Parking provision

Garden (min.) (sq m)

Garden provision (sq m)

1 4 3 3 (parking court)

100 85

2 1 1 1 (parking court)

- -

3 2 2 2 (parking court)

25 25 (communal)

4 2 2 2 (parking court)

25 25 (communal)

5 1 1 1 (parking court)

- -

6 2 2 2 (parking court)

25 25 (communal)

7 2 2 2 (parking court)

25 25 (communal)

8 3 2 2 (parking court)

26

10 4 3 4 100 > 100

11 6 3 4 100 > 100

12 4 3 4 100 > 100

13 6 3 4 100 > 100

14 3 2 2 100 115

15 6 3 3 100 > 100

16 6 3 3 100 > 100

17 5 3 3 100 100

18 (Bungalow)

2 2 3 50 45

19 6 3 3 100 > 100

20 5 3 3 100 > 100

21 5 3 4 100 > 100

22 5 3 4 100 > 100

23 3 2 2 100 115

Visitors - 6 6 - -

Note: There is no Plot 9.

Page 124

Application no.: UTT/16/2149/FUL

Address: Former Ridleys Brewery, Mill Lane Hartford End

© Crown copyright and database rights 2016 Ordnance Survey 0100018688

Organisation: Uttlesford District Council

Department: Planning

Date: 02 November 2016

Page 125

Page 126

UTT/16/2654/FUL (HENHAM)

(Referred to Committee because applicant is related to a member of staff)

PROPOSAL: Conversion of barn to dwelling LOCATION: Parsonage Bury Farm, Church End, Church Street, Henham APPLICANT: J F Pimblett & Sons AGENT: Mr A Chapman EXPIRY DATE: 18th November 2016 CASE OFFICER: Mrs Madeleine Jones

1. NOTATION 1.1 Outside of Development Limits, Conservation Area. Tree Preservation Order.

Archaeological Site. Contaminated Site 2. DESCRIPTION OF SITE 2.1 Parsonage Bury Farm is a traditional farmstead located on the edge of Henham.

The property is a redundant agricultural building, previously used for stabling horses, and is currently used for storage. The building is a red brick building with a double pitched slate roof with a central valley and gables to the west. There are double timber doors and louvre vents to the front northern elevation. There are two further vents to the western elevation. The barn is attached to other barns that have been converted into holiday lets and residential use

3. PROPOSAL 3.1 The proposal is to convert a barn into residential use for use as an annexe.

It is proposed to convert the redundant barn into a one bedroomed dwelling, there would be two parking spaces serving the dwelling and a garden of 60m2. Access would be via the existing drive which serves the Farmhouse, commercial premises and two holiday lets. There is a further access from a lane that leads to Old Mead Road.

4. APPLICANT’S CASE 4.1 The application is supported by a Heritage, Design and Access Statement,

Contamination Survey, Bat Assessment Report, completed Biodiversity Questionnaire, Bat Survey and Structural Report

5. RELEVANT SITE HISTORY 5.1 There is an extensive planning history on the farmstead. The adjacent barns were

given permission to be converted into holiday lets under UTT/0291/99/FUL 6. POLICIES 6.1 National Policies

Page 127

- National Planning Policy Framework 6.2 Uttlesford Local Plan (2005) 6.3 - Policy S7: The Countryside

- Policy GEN1: Access - Policy GEN2: Design - Policy ENV1: Design of Development within Conservation Areas - Policy GEN7: Nature Conservation - Policy GEN8: Vehicle Parking Standards - Policy ENV4: Sites of Archaeological Importance - Policy ENV3: Open Spaces and Trees - Policy ENV14: Contaminated Land

7. PARISH COUNCIL COMMENTS 7.1 No reply received. Expiry date 17th October 2016 8. CONSULTATIONS Essex County Council - Ecology 8.1 No objections subject to the imposition of a condition relating to

European protected species licensing Essex County Council - Highways 8.2 From a highway and transportation perspective the Highway Authority has no

comments to make on this proposal as it is not contrary to the relevant transportation policies contained within the Highway Authority’s Development Management Policies, adopted as County Council Supplementary Guidance in February 2011 and Uttlesford Local Plan Policy GEN1.

9. REPRESENTATIONS 9.1 This application has been advertised and 15 neighbours written to. No replies have

been received. Expiry date 17th October 2016 10. APPRAISAL The issues to consider in the determination of the application are: A Whether the proposed development is appropriate in this location (ULP Policy S7

and NPPF)

B Whether the conversion of the barn to a dwelling is an appropriate form of development for this building (ULP Policies H6, ENV1, ENV4, NPPF)

C Whether there would be any amenity issues arising from the proposal (ULP Policy GEN2

D Whether the proposed access and parking arrangements would be appropriate (ULP Policies GEN1 and GEN8)

Page 128

E Whether the proposals would result in any adverse impacts on protected species (ULP Policy GEN7; NPPF)

F Contamination (ULP Policy ENV14) A Whether the proposed development is appropriate in this location (ULP Policy

S7 and NPPF) 10.1 S70 of The Town and Country Planning Act 1990 requires the local planning

authority, in dealing with a planning application, to have regard to the provisions of the development plan, so far as material to the application, and to any other material considerations.

10.2 S38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 requires that, if regard is

to be had to the development plan for the purpose of any determination to be made under the planning Acts, the determination must be made in accordance with the plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise.

10.3 The application site is located Outside Development Limits , within the Conservation

Area of Henham. Consequently for the purposes of planning, the site is considered to be within the countryside and subject to all national and local policies.

10.4 Policy S7 of the Local Plan advises that there will be strict control on buildings in the

countryside, with planning permission only being given for development that needs to be there. The review of the Local Plan policies considered that Policy S7 of the adopted Local Plan is partly consistent with the NPPF in that the protection and enhancement of the natural environment is an important part of the environmental dimension of sustainable development but that the NPPF takes a positive approach, rather than a protective one. Therefore, Policy S7 is still relevant to the consideration of this application.

10.5 In addition, the core principles at paragraph 17 of the Framework include that

development should be genuinely plan-led; and that the intrinsic character and beauty of the countryside should be recognised.

10.6 The proposals involve the re-use of a barn to form a new residential unit. No new

buildings are proposed and the external footprint of the buildings would not be altered. The use of the building for residential purposes rather than stables/storage is likely to result in additional residential paraphernalia which could impact on the openness of the countryside; however, this impact would need to be weighed up against other policy considerations.

10.7 Given that the proposal is for the conversion of the existing building, the majority of

the built form on the site has already been established. The alterations necessary to convert the building are deemed to be minor given the circumstances of the site and surrounding area.

10.8 In view of the above, it is considered that on balance the proposal would not cause

significant harm to the intrinsic value and beauty of the countryside, this being one of the core principles set out in policy S7 and at paragraph 17 of the National Planning Policy Framework

10.9 Paragraphs 7 and 14 of the NPPF set out that there is a presumption in favour of

sustainable development. . Relevant policies for the supply of housing should not be

Page 129

considered up-to-date if the local planning authority cannot demonstrate a 5-year supply of deliverable housing sites. The Council can demonstrate a deliverable 5 year supply of housing land. Notwithstanding this applications have to be considered against the guidance set out in Paragraphs 6 - 15 of the NPPF. The Council needs to continue to consider, and where appropriate, approve development which is sustainable and meets its housing objectives. This means that applications for sustainable development outside development limits may need to continue to be granted where appropriate to ensure the level of housing supply is robust and provides a continuous delivery of housing.

10.10 The core principles of the NPPF set out the three strands of sustainable

development. These are the economic role, social role and environmental role. The NPPF specifically states that these roles should not be undertaken in isolation, because they are mutually dependent. To achieve sustainable development economic, social and environmental gains should be sought jointly and simultaneously. It is therefore necessary to consider these three principles.

10.11 Economic role: The NPPF identifies this as contributing to building a strong,

responsive and competitive economy, supporting growth and innovation and by identifying and coordinating development requirements, including the provision of infrastructure. In economic terms the proposal would have short term benefits to the local economy as a result of construction activity and as such there would be some positive economic benefit.

10.12 Social role: The NPPF identifies this as supplying required housing and creating

high quality built environment with accessible local services that reflect the community's needs and support its health, social and cultural well-being. In addition paragraph 55 of the Framework advices that to promote sustainable development in rural areas, housing should be located where it will enhance or maintain the vitality of rural communities whilst avoiding isolated homes. The site is not considered to be in an isolated location. The occupants of the dwelling would use the services and facilities within Henham. The site has good connectivity with adjacent settlements and therefore future occupants would not be totally dependent on a car.

10.13 Environmental role: The NPPF identifies this as contributing to protecting and

enhancing our natural, built and historic environment, including, inter alia, improvements to biodiversity and minimising waste. From an environmental aspect, the proposal would protect and enhance a traditional vernacular building that adds visual interest to the surrounding rural landscape setting and makes efficient use of a redundant building.

10.14 The proposal is considered to meet the three principles of sustainable development. B Whether the conversion of the barn to a dwelling is an appropriate form of

development for this building (ULP Policies H6, ENV1, ENV4, NPPF 10.15 Policy H6 relates to the conversion of rural buildings to residential use and is only

partly consistent with the NPPF. Policy H6 is inconsistent with the National Planning Policy Framework as it includes no preferences for any particular new use of a converted building and it does not have to be structurally sound or require the historic, traditional or vernacular of the converted building to enhance the character and appearance of the rural area. In accordance with paragraph 215 of the NPPF, only limited weight can be given to policy H6. However in saying this, it should be noted that the existing barn is structurally sound capable of conversion without the

Page 130

need for major works and its design would be one of tradition features to enhance the surrounding rural area. In terms of design the proposal is considered to be low key and one which would retain as much as possible of the existing characteristics of this building.

10.16 Given the location of the building, the access being in very close proximity to

Parsonage Barns Farmhouse, that the building is attached to a residential building, and taking into account that other redundant buildings have already been converted for commercial uses (including a micro-brewery) , it is considered that further commercial uses in this building would be likely to result in loss of residential amenity. Tourist accommodation could be appropriate for this building, however planning permission has previously been granted for such a use of two adjacent barns so the need for this use is already met to some degree.

10.17 Policy GEN2 requires development proposals, inter alia, to be compatible with the

scale, form, layout, appearance and materials of surrounding buildings. It also requires development to safeguard important environmental features in its setting, enabling their retention and helping to reduce the visual impact of new buildings or structures where appropriate.

10.18 The site is located within the Conservation Area where, development will be

permitted where it preserves or enhances the character and appearance of the essential features of a Conservation Area. The main external changes will be to change the old timber doors with a new door and side screens together with fitting new windows into the side elevation(below and including the existing openings). External finishing materials are appropriate and the amount of glazing has been kept to a minimum to keep the rural fell of the building. No trees or hedges are to be removed as part of the proposal. The building is quite run down and its conversion would enhance the character of the Conservation Area and is considered to comply with policy ENV1 subject to an appropriate condition in respect of boundary treatment.

10.19 Policy GEN2 is supplemented by the SPD entitled Accessible Homes and

Playspace which requires compliance with the Lifetime Homes Standards, however, the revised building regulations M4(2) do not apply to barn conversions.

10.20 The proposal would provide a rear garden of 60m2 which meets the recommended

garden space within the Essex Design Guide of 50m2 (for the size of the dwelling) The proposal is considered to comply with policy GEN2. This area , however should be private amenity space and in view of its proximity to farm buildings, should be enclosed by appropriate boundary treatment. This can be achieved by an appropriate condition.

C Whether there would be any amenity issues arising from the proposal (ULP

Policy GEN2

10.21 Policy GEN2 relates to design and seeks to ensure development proposals protect the amenity of existing residents and provide a form of development that meets the reasonable needs of potential users. Given the orientation of the existing building with the other residential buildings, It is not considered that, the proposal would result in any, material, detrimental overshadowing, overlooking or have an overbearing impact on neighbours amenity.

D Whether the proposed access and parking arrangements would be

appropriate (ULP Policies GEN1 and GEN8)

Page 131

10.22 The proposal would create a one bedroomed dwelling and as such the dwelling

would need one parking space to comply with the recommended adopted parking standards. The proposal meets the adopted standards and as such it is considered that adequate parking provision would be provided for the size of the property and complies with ULP Policy GEN8. The access to the proposed dwelling already serves the Farmhouse, the holiday lets, commercial buildings and other farm buildings. The increase in vehicular traffic on this access should not give rise to any adverse loss of residential amenity. In addition it is not envisaged that any significant highway safety concerns would arise as a result of the proposals. The proposals comply with Policy GEN1.

E Whether the proposals would result in any adverse impacts on protected species (ULP Policy GEN7; NPPF)

10.23 Policy GEN7 of the Local Plan states that development that would have a harmful

effect on wildlife will not be permitted unless the need for the development outweighs the importance of the feature of nature conservation. Where the site includes protected species, measures to mitigate and/or compensate for the potential impacts of development must be secured. Paragraph 118 of the NPPF requires decisions to conserve and enhance biodiversity. In paragraph 119 it states that the presumption in favour of sustainable development does not apply where development requiring appropriate assessment under the Birds or Habitats Directives is being considered, planned or determined..

10.24 In this instance a bat survey has been submitted with the planning application and

during the dusk survey two species of bat were recorded flying within the area with one species confirmed as roosting in the redundant farm building. Due to the fact that all species of bat are protected by the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 (as amended) and there is likely to be disturbance to a bat roosting site as a result of the conversion works, before any building works can commence a licence to derogate from this protection will need to be granted by Natural England. The applicant has also completed a biodiversity checklist questionnaire and accordingly Essex County Council Ecologists have been consulted. They have no objections subject to the imposition of a condition relating to European protected species licensing. They state that the roost is of low significance, and the mitigation proposed is both proportionate and species-appropriate. The roost although disturbed during work will be reinstated fully post-completion. A bat box will also be erected on the building as supplementary roosting provision. As such subject to the compliance of appropriate conditions, the proposal would comply with policy GEN7.

F Contamination (ULP Policy ENV14

10.25 The constraints sheet identifies the site as being a historic contaminated land use

area. Environmental Health Officers have advised on the previously withdrawn application for the same site that the previous use of the land is not considered to constrain development to residential use and no further details on the potential for contamination of the site would be required

11. CONCLUSION The following is a summary of the main reasons for the recommendation: A The proposals are considered to meet the three principles of sustainable

Page 132

development. The proposal would not cause significant harm to the intrinsic value and beauty of the countryside, this being one of the core principles set out in policy S7 and paragraph 17 of the National Planning Policy Framework

B The design and appearance of the conversion is acceptable. C The proposal would not result in any material detrimental impact to neighbours

amenity and complies with ULP policies GEN2 and GEN4. D Adequate parking has been provided. The proposed access is acceptable. The

proposal complies with of ULP Policies GEN1 and GEN8. E Subject to compliance with an appropriate condition the proposal the proposal would

comply with policy GEN7 F The previous use of the land is not considered to constrain development to

residential use RECOMMENDATION – APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS Conditions 1. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of 3 years

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

2. Work to the barn shall not in any circumstances commence unless the local

planning authority has been provided with either: a)a licence issued by Natural England pursuant to Regulation 53 of The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 authorizing the specified activity/development to go ahead; or b)a statement in writing from the relevant licensing body to the effect that it does not consider that the specified activity/development will require a licence. The supporting method statement shall accord with the Bat Report (Jones and Sons Environmental, August 2016) in all respects and unless otherwise agreed.

REASON: The bat survey (August 2016) identifies the barn to be a day roost for small numbers of common pipistrelle bats. It is a roost of low significance, and the mitigation proposed is both proportionate and species-appropriate. The roost although disturbed during work will be reinstated fully post-completion. Justification: This condition is required to be a pre-commencement condition due to the statutory requirements relating to protected species

3 Occupation of the development hereby permitted shall not take place until details of

the boundary treatment to the amenity area has been submitted to and approved by the local planning authority in writing. Such boundary treatment shall be erected in accordance with the approved scheme before the building is first occupied. REASON: To protect the future occupiers of the dwelling due to its proximity to farm buildings and to provide a private amenity area in accordance with ULP policy GEN2

Page 133

Application no.: UTT/16/2654/FUL

Address: Parsonage Bury Farm, Church End

Church Street, Henham

Bishops Stortford

© Crown copyright and database rights 2016 Ordnance Survey 0100018688

Organisation: Uttlesford District Council

Department: Planning

Date: 02 November 2016

Page 134

UTT/16/1881/FUL (GREAT CANFIELD)

(MAJOR)

PROPOSAL: Demolition of redundant farm buildings. Construction of new holiday lets, café/shop, and cookery school/offices.

LOCATION: Bullocks Farm, Bullocks Lane, Hope End Green, Great Canfield APPLICANT: Mrs J Jewell AGENT: Pocknell Studio EXPIRY DATE: 23 November 2016 CASE OFFICER: Luke Mills

1. NOTATION 1.1 Countryside. 2. DESCRIPTION OF SITE 2.1 The application site is located off Bullocks Lane, in the hamlet of Hope End Green. It

accommodates part of a small farm complex containing redundant agricultural buildings.

3. PROPOSAL 3.1 The application is for planning permission to demolish four redundant farm

buildings, and to erect replacement buildings which would accommodate various uses including holiday lets, a café, a delicatessen, a cookery school and an office.

4. APPLICANT’S CASE 4.1 The applicant’s case is presented in the submitted Design and Access Statement. 5. RELEVANT SITE HISTORY 5.1 The adjacent L-shaped building, which forms part of the original farm complex, has

been converted to offices following grants of planning permission in 2001 and 2009 (UTT/0132/01/FUL & UTT/0832/09/FUL).

6. POLICIES

- National Planning Policy Framework

6.1 S70 of The Town and Country Planning Act 1990 requires the local planning authority, in dealing with a planning application, to have regard to the provisions of the development plan, so far as material to the application, and to any other material considerations.

6.2 S38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 requires that, if regard is

to be had to the development plan for the purpose of any determination to be made

Page 135

under the planning Acts, the determination must be made in accordance with the plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise.

6.3 Uttlesford District Council Local Plan 2005

- S7 – The Countryside - GEN1 – Access - GEN2 – Design - GEN4 – Good Neighbourliness - GEN6 – Infrastructure Provision to Support Development - GEN7 – Nature Conservation - GEN8 – Vehicle Parking Standards - E3 – Access to Workplaces - E4 – Farm Diversification: Alternative Use of Farmland - E5 – Re-Use of Rural Buildings - ENV5 – Protection of Agricultural Land - ENV8 – Other Landscapes of Importance to Nature Conservation - ENV10 – Noise Sensitive Development and Disturbance from Aircraft - ENV11 – Noise Generators - ENV14 – Contaminated Land - LC2 – Access to Leisure and Cultural Facilities - LC5 – Hotels and Bed and Breakfast Accommodation

6.4 The following documents are relevant to the interpretation of the above policies:

- Parking Standards: Design and Good Practice

National Policies 6.5 The following paragraphs of the NPPF are relevant to the determination of this

application: - 14 – Presumption in favour of sustainable development - 17 – Core planning principles - 25 – Ensuring the vitality of town centres - 28 – Supporting a prosperous rural economy - 32 – Promoting sustainable transport - 34 – Promoting sustainable transport - 39 – Promoting sustainable transport - 41 – Promoting sustainable transport - 58 – Requiring good design - 112 – Conserving and enhancing the natural environment - 118 – Conserving and enhancing the natural environment - 120-121 – Conserving and enhancing the natural environment - 123 – Conserving and enhancing the natural environment - 144 – Facilitating the sustainable use of minerals

6.6 The following national policies and guidance are also relevant:

- House of Commons Written Statement 161: Sustainable drainage systems - The town and country planning (safeguarded aerodromes, technical sites and

military explosives storage areas) direction 2002 - Planning Update: Written statement (HCWS488) (2015)

Page 136

7. PARISH COUNCIL COMMENTS 7.1 Great Canfield Parish Council has raised concerns regarding road safety and

damage to the roadside verges and village green. 8. CONSULTATIONS Natural England 8.1 No objections. Extract:

“the application is not likely to result in significant impacts on statutory designated nature conservation sites or landscapes.”

UDC Environmental Health 8.2 No objections, subject to conditions. Extract:

“Based on the information provided with the application I have concerns that the land may be affected by contamination arising from its previous agricultural use and storage of machineryG In accordance with the model procedures for management of land contamination, further investigations are required to identify the risks to the future users of the site and where necessary remedial measures to ensure that the suit is suitable for use.”

UDC Environmental Health (Commercial Team) 8.3 No objections. Education Authority (Essex County Council) 8.4 No requirement for a financial contribution towards education provision. Highway Authority (Essex County Council) 8.5 No objections, subject to conditions. Ecological Consultant (ECC Place Services) 8.6 No objections. Lead Local Flood Authority (Essex County Council) 8.7 No objections, following a reduction in floor space which ensures that the

development is not a ‘major development’. London Stansted Airport 8.8 No objections, subject to conditions. Minerals and Waste Planning Authority (Essex County Council) 8.9 No objections, following the submission of further information.

Page 137

9. REPRESENTATIONS 9.1 Neighbours were notified of the application by letter and a notice was displayed near

the site. A number of representations were received, which raise concerns regarding: 1. Road safety 2. Noise from proposed use and vehicle movements 3. Harm to the character of the area 4. Harm to biodiversity 5. Noise from construction 6. Removal of asbestos as part of demolition works 7. Damage to village green and residents’ driveways from vehicle movements

9.2 Points 1 to 4 are addressed in the below appraisal. Separate legislation covers

points 5 and 6, and the damage to property referred to in point 7 is not a material consideration.

10. APPRAISAL The issues to consider in the determination of the application are: A Character and appearance (S7, GEN2, E4, E5, LC5, 17 & 58) B Sustainable transport (GEN1 & 34) C Road safety (GEN1 & 32) D Parking (GEN8, 39 & HCWS488) E Accessibility (GEN2, E3 & LC2) F Amenity (GEN4, ENV10, ENV11, 17 & 123) G Infrastructure (GEN6) H Biodiversity (GEN7, ENV8 & 118) I Protection of agricultural land (ENV5 & 112) J Contaminated land (ENV14 & 120-121) K Sustainable drainage (HCWS161) L Aerodrome safeguarding (41) M Vitality of town centres (25) N Rural economy (28) O Minerals safeguarding (144) A Character and appearance (S7, GEN2, E4, E5, LC5, 17 & 58) 10.1 The application site is located beyond Development Limits, where Policy S7 restricts

development to that which is necessary or appropriate for a rural area. Taking into account policies E4, E5 and LC5, it is considered that the proposed range of uses could be supported. However, the proposal does not fit perfectly into either category represented by Policy E4, which relates to farm diversification and does not prohibit the erection of new buildings, or the combination of policies E5 and LC5, which relate to the re-use of rural buildings.

10.2 Policy E5 is supportive of the proposed uses, beyond Development Limits, provided

that existing buildings would be re-used. While the proposal does not include such reuse, it is recognised that the buildings to be demolished are of permanent and substantial construction. It is considered that the aim of the policy is to limit the visual impact of new development, thereby protecting the character and appearance of the countryside. It therefore follows that a sensitive redevelopment of a site that currently has a significant visual impact could achieve an equivalent result.

Page 138

10.3 The proposed buildings in the eastern part of the site would appear more solid than

the existing open-fronted structures, although the layout and scale would be similar. The two holiday let buildings in the south-west corner would be of a similar scale to the barns they would replace, but they would be reoriented 90 degrees. It is considered that the proposed layout would successfully maintain the character of a farmyard surrounded by a cluster of utilitarian, rural buildings. The designs would reflect the rural character of the area, using simple forms and a palette of appropriate materials including vertical timber boarding and metal and slate roofs.

10.4 The capture of a small portion of the adjacent field would have little impact on the

operation of the farm, but could provide an opportunity for landscape enhancement through appropriate planting. The existing trees identified for removal are Category B or below and none are the subject of a Tree Preservation Order, such that their removal is not considered harmful to the character of the area.

10.5 Taking into account the above assessment, it is considered that the new buildings

would protect the rural character of the area by virtue of their scale, layout and design as compared to the existing buildings on the site. Therefore, the proposal is consistent with the aim of Policy E5 and, consequently, Policy LC5, such that it would be appropriate to its surroundings in accordance with policies S7 and GEN2.

10.6 Paragraphs 17 and 58 of the NPPF support the aims of protecting rural character

and requiring good design that responds to its surroundings. It is a less restrictive approach to that within the development plan, and it is considered that the above assessment demonstrates accordance with these paragraphs.

B Sustainable transport (GEN1 & 34) 10.7 It is likely that the main form of transport for visitors and employees would be the

car, in conflict with Policy GEN1. Nevertheless, paragraph 34 of the NPPF indicates that a more permissive approach should be taken in rural areas, provided that other relevant policies are complied with. Taking into account the support at paragraph 28 for rural economic growth, which is described more fully in the relevant section of this report, it is considered that the lack of sustainable transport opportunities should not weigh heavily against the development.

C Road safety (GEN1 & 32) 10.8 The site would be accessed via the existing entrance from Bullocks Lane. Taking

into account the comments of the highway authority, it is considered that there would be no detrimental effect on road safety. Therefore, the proposal complies with Policy GEN1 and paragraph 32 of the NPPF.

D Parking (GEN8, 39 & HCWS488) 10.9 The holiday lets are considered to fall within the Use Class C1 category for the

purposes of the parking standards. Therefore, the requirement for this element of the proposal is for a maximum of 13 spaces.

10.10 The deli/café is considered to fall within the Use Class A3 category for the purposes

of the parking standards. Therefore, the requirement for this element of the proposal is for a maximum of 20 spaces.

10.11 While the cookery school does not fit into any of the categories for the purposes of

Page 139

the parking standards, it is clear that the maximum parking requirement would be greater than 33 spaces. As the proposed car park would have a total of 21 spaces, there would be no conflict with the standards.

10.12 Taking into account the comments of the highway authority, it is considered that no

further spaces are required in the interests of preventing on-street parking. E Accessibility (GEN2, E3 & LC2) 10.13 Policies GEN2, E3 and LC2 seek a high standard of accessibility for the

development. However, the Council has not adopted any applicable technical standards. Taking into account the level access afforded by the predominantly ground floor layout, it is considered that compliance with the Building Regulations would ensure an appropriate degree of accessibility.

F Amenity (GEN4, ENV10, ENV11, 17 & 123) 10.14 The site’s neighbours include offices, the farmhouse and various business units at

Little Bullocks Farm. It is unlikely that the proposed uses would generate a significant level of nuisance or disturbance, either through on-site activities or the associated vehicle movements. The opening hours for the deli/café would be limited through the use of a planning condition to the hours quoted on the application form, thereby limiting evening and night-time disturbance. Overall, it is considered that there would be no conflict with policies GEN4, ENV10 or ENV11, or with paragraphs 17 or 123 of the NPPF.

G Infrastructure (GEN6) 10.15 Taking into account the comments of the education authority, it is considered that

the proposal does not give rise to a requirement for contributions towards infrastructure.

H Biodiversity (GEN7, ENV8 & 118) 10.16 The proposal includes the clearance of buildings and vegetation prior to

redevelopment. Taking into account the comments of the Council’s ecological consultant, it is considered unlikely that there would be any significant adverse effects on any protected species or valuable habitats.

I Protection of agricultural land (ENV5 & 112) 10.17 Policy ENV5 seeks to prevent significant losses of the best and most versatile

(BMV) agricultural land, and paragraph 112 of the NPPF has a similar objective. While the portion of farmland is classified as Grade 2, which is regarded as BMV land, its transformation into a landscaped area would not represent a significant breach of these policies because the land is small in agricultural terms.

J Contaminated land (ENV14 & 120-121) 10.18 Taking into account the comments of the Environmental Health Officer, it is

considered that the site could be affected by contamination due to its previous use. To ensure compliance with Policy ENV14 and paragraphs 120-121 of the NPPF, conditions could be used to ensure appropriate site investigation.

K Sustainable drainage (HCWS161)

Page 140

10.19 The design first submitted with the application resulted in a floor area of greater than

1000 sq m, which necessitated the use of a sustainable drainage system (SuDS) in accordance with HCWS161. However, subsequent amendments have resulted in the omission of a SuDS and a reduction in the floor area to approximately 987 sq m, thereby removing the requirement and resolving the initial objection raised by the lead local flood authority regarding the suitability of the submitted drainage information.

L Aerodrome safeguarding (41) 10.20 Stansted Airport suggested in its consultation response that conditions should be

used to ensure that the SuDS does not cause issues regarding aerodrome safeguarding. However, as explained above, the SuDS has been removed from the proposal so it is considered unnecessary to use these conditions.

M Vitality of town centres (25) 10.21 Paragraph 25 of the NPPF confirms that small scale rural development is exempted

from the sequential approach that seeks to prevent the outward movement of town centre uses. It is therefore considered that the site is suitable for the proposed office and deli/café in this context.

N Rural economy (28) 10.22 Paragraph 28 of the NPPF supports the sustainable growth and expansion of all

types of business and enterprise in rural areas, and promotes the diversification of agricultural and other land-based rural businesses. It is therefore considered that the positive economic effect of the proposal should be given significant weight.

O Minerals safeguarding (144) 10.23 The site is located close to sites allocated in the Minerals Local Plan (2014) and the

Replacement Waste Local Plan (2016). The minerals and waste planning authority, Essex County Council, required during the application process the submission of further information regarding the potential effects of noise, visual impact and dust on the proposed development, which could affect the operation of the allocated sites. Taking into account the authority’s comments following the submission of this information, it is considered that the mitigation which would form part of any minerals and waste developments would be sufficient to prevent adverse effects on those occupying and visiting the application site.

11. CONCLUSION The following is a summary of the main reasons for the recommendation: A The proposal breaches Policy GEN1 of the Local Plan with regard to the lack of

sustainable transport opportunities. However, other development plan policies provide support for business uses in rural areas, which will normally be located where sustainable transport opportunities are limited. It is considered in this case that the adverse environmental effect is outweighed by the positive economic effect, such that the proposal is in accordance with the development plan as a whole.

B The proposal accords with all relevant policies of the National Planning Policy

Framework, and there are no material considerations which indicate that planning

Page 141

permission should be refused. RECOMMENDATION – APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS Conditions 1. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of 3 years

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

2. Prior to commencement of the development, details of the following external finishes

(including samples and/or photographs as appropriate) must be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority: - Walls: Vertical board; Bricks - Roof: Metal; Slates The development must be carried out in accordance with the approved details. REASON: To ensure compatibility with the character of the area, in accordance with Policy S7 and Policy GEN2 of the Uttlesford Local Plan (adopted 2005). This condition must be ‘pre-commencement’ to ensure that the development is only carried out in accordance with the above details.

3. Prior to commencement of the development, details of the following hard

landscaping works must be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority: - Hard surfaces - Boundary treatment All hard landscape works must be carried out in accordance with the approved details. REASON: To ensure compatibility with the character of the area, in accordance with Policy S7 and Policy GEN2 of the Uttlesford Local Plan (adopted 2005). This condition must be ‘pre-commencement’ to ensure that the development is only carried out in accordance with the above details.

4. Prior to commencement of the development, an assessment of the nature and

extent of contamination must be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. This assessment must be undertaken by a competent person, and must assess any contamination on the site, whether or not it originates on the site. It must include: (i) a survey of the extent, scale and nature of contamination (ii) an assessment of the potential risks to human health, property (existing or proposed) including buildings, crops, livestock, pets, woodland and service lines and pipes, adjoining land, groundwaters and surface waters, ecological systems, archaeological sites and ancient monuments

Page 142

(iii) an appraisal of remedial options, and proposal of the preferred option(s). The assessment must be conducted in accordance with DEFRA and the Environment Agency's "Model Procedures for the Management of Land Contamination, CLR11". REASON: In the interests of safety, residential amenity and proper planning of the area, in accordance with Policies GEN2, GEN4 and ENV14 of the Uttlesford Local Plan (adopted 2005). This condition must be ‘pre-commencement’ to ensure that the development is only carried out in accordance with the above details.

5. Prior to commencement of the development, a detailed remediation scheme must

be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The scheme must include all works to be undertaken, proposed remediation objectives and remediation criteria, and a timetable of works and site management procedures. The scheme must ensure that the site will not qualify as contaminated land under Part 2A of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 in relation to the intended use of the land after remediation. REASON: In the interests of safety, residential amenity and proper planning of the area, in accordance with Policies GEN2, GEN4 and ENV14 of the Uttlesford Local Plan (adopted 2005). This condition must be ‘pre-commencement’ to ensure that the development is only carried out in accordance with the above details.

6. Remediation must be carried out in accordance with the details approved pursuant

to Condition 5 prior to commencement of the development (other than that required to carry out the remediation) unless otherwise agreed by the local planning authority. Within three months of the completion of measures identified in the approved remediation scheme, a validation report that demonstrates the effectiveness of the remediation must be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. REASON: In the interests of safety, residential amenity and proper planning of the area, in accordance with Policies GEN2, GEN4 and ENV14 of the Uttlesford Local Plan (adopted 2005).

7. In the event that contamination is found at any time when carrying out the approved

development that was not previously identified, it must be reported immediately to the local planning authority and work halted on the part of the site affected by the unexpected contamination. Prior to re-commencement of development, an assessment conforming to the requirements of Condition 4 must be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. If the assessment identifies that remediation is necessary, a remediation scheme conforming to the requirements of Condition 5 must be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority prior to re-commencement of the development. Remediation must be carried out in accordance with the approved remediation scheme prior to re-commencement of the development, and a validation report conforming to the requirements of Condition 6 must be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority within 2 months of the completion of measures identified in the approved remediation scheme. REASON: In the interests of safety, residential amenity and proper planning of the area, in accordance with Policies GEN2, GEN4 and ENV14 of the Uttlesford Local

Page 143

Plan (adopted 2005). 8. Prior to occupation of the development, the vehicle parking area must be laid out

and surfaced in accordance with Drawing No. PSBF 16/LAND/01 Rev D. REASON: To prevent on-street parking of vehicles, in the interests of highway safety and in accordance with Policy GEN1 of the Uttlesford Local Plan (adopted 2005) and the National Planning Policy Framework.

9. Prior to occupation of the development, details of all external lighting and

consequent light pollution must be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The lighting must be installed in accordance with the approved details prior to occupation of the development. REASON: To preserve the rural character of the area, in accordance with Policy S7 of the Uttlesford Local Plan (adopted 2005) and the National Planning Policy Framework.

10. The development must be carried out in accordance with the tree protection

measures in the following documents: - Arboricultural Method Statement (AMS) and Tree Protection Plan (TPP), prepared by O.R. Booth (Writtle Forest Consultancy Ltd) and dated 23/09/2016 - Drawing No. 001 Rev. 1 (Tree Protection Plan) REASON: To prevent the unnecessary loss of trees which contribute to the character of the area, in accordance with Policy S7 of the Uttlesford Local Plan (adopted 2005) and the National Planning Policy Framework

11. The deli/café hereby permitted must not be open to the public other than between

the hours of 08:00 until 18:30 Monday to Saturday, and 08:00 until 16:30 Sunday. REASON: In accordance with the proposed opening hours and to prevent harm to the living conditions of nearby residents from noise disturbance, in accordance with Policy GEN4 and ENV11 of the Uttlesford Local Plan (2005) and the National Planning Policy Framework.

Page 144

Application no.: UTT/16/1881/FUL

Address: Bullocks Farm, Bullocks Lane, Great Canfield

© Crown copyright and database rights 2016 Ordnance Survey 0100018688

Organisation: Uttlesford District Council

Department: Planning

Date: 02 November 2016

Page 145

Page 146

UTT/16/2492/FUL (GREAT DUNMOW)

MAJOR APPLICATION

PROPOSAL: Proposed erection of grain store and conditioning facilities LOCATION: Dunmow Farm, The Broadway, Dunmow APPLICANT: Mr G Peacock AGENT: Mr G O’Connell EXPIRY DATE: 7th December 2016 CASE OFFICER: Mrs Madeleine Jones

1. NOTATION 1.1 Outside Development Limits. 2. DESCRIPTION OF SITE 2.1 The site is located to the east of The Broadway in Great Dunmow. The site is 0.11

hectares and forms part of Dunmow Farm which is farmed over a total of 414 hectares of which 355 hectares is cultivated crops. Dunmow Farm is the operating base for a predominantly arable farming business. There are two buildings adjacent to the application site, located between the site and the road, one which was formerly a hangar is used as a general purpose building where machinery can be housed and occasionally it is used for grain storage and a smaller purpose built grain store. There is soft landscaping along the road frontage and a concrete access road which passes to the west of the existing farm buildings. To the rear, west and east of the site are agricultural fields.

3. PROPOSAL 3.1 This application relates to the erection of a new grain store. It would be 42m long

25m wide and it would have a ridged roof with a height to the eaves of 7m and total height of 10.4m. attached to the building there would be a further bay that would measure 12.7m high, 12m deep and 5.7m wide (housing the mechanical handling system) and adjacent to this would be grain dryer. The buildings would be accessed by an existing access which also serves the existing buildings to the north west of the site. The walls of the building would be externally clad with grey pvc covered steel sheets above a concrete plinth, with a natural tone fibre cement sheeted roof. There is no additional parking provision provided.

4. APPLICANT’S CASE 4.1 The application is supported by a Design and Access Statement and a completed

Biodiversity Questionnaire. 4.2 Dunmow Farm, Stebbing is the operating base for a predominantly arable farming

business. The smaller building at the east of the site is a purpose built grain store, which has limitations in both design capabilities and scale. The larger building was formerly a hangar and is used as a general purpose building

Page 147

where machinery can be housed. Occasionally it can be used for short term grain storage, but that use is restrictive because there are no specific facilities for crop conditioning.

4.3 Since these buildings were constructed the farming business based here has

changed in nature, the size of farming equipment is now larger, and the area farmed has increased.

4.4 There have been no new buildings erected on the site, or elsewhere on the farm, for

more than 20 years. 4.5 The farm incorporates land situated in a block around Dunmow Farm and with the

site being located centrally with easy road access; it is ideally positioned as a base for the farming activities.

4.6 Cropping typically includes wheat, barley, oats, oilseeds and beans. Most crops

tend to need long term storage, as they are sold throughout the year, and there can be price premiums through that period for doing so.

4.7 Current regulations governing the storage of combinable crops require the grain to

be of a suitable moisture content and temperature. Failure to achieve this could lead to infestation of pests and incidence of disease, so rendering the crop worthless

4.8 Correct storage and conditioning of combinable crops preserves their quality.

Longer term storage facilities allows produce to be marketed throughout the year, so enabling better returns and cash flow, and reducing the impact of traffic flows at harvest time.

4.9 Crop rotations result in different volumes of individual crops each year, but, typically,

production amounts to some 1350t of wheat, 250t of barley, 450t of oats, 200t of oilseeds and 200t of beans.

4.10 These need to be stored and conditioned separately, so some flexibility in the

facilities is necessary and the proposed store will have two separate storage areas to help facilitate this. For the smaller crops, partitions can be used to provide separated storage and these will restrict the overall capacity.

4.11 Currently, some crops have to be held on a temporary basis in non-enclosed areas

and other inappropriate buildings and sold very soon after harvest. 4.12 In consequence, it has been decided that it would be appropriate to construct

additional storage adjacent to the existing buildings to be able to make some use of the same yard, access and electricity supply.

4.13 The visual impact of the new building from the road will be limited as it will be

shielded to a large extent by the existing buildings. The eaves height of the building has been carefully considered to allow for the safe internal operation of farm machinery, and to provide adequate storage capacity on a limited floor area. The size would allow for a total crop capacity of approximately 2400t of grain.

4.14 As the farm has recently been acquired we are not absolutely certain where the

previous owner stored their crops, however none of the other buildings are suitable for crop storage which meets Assured Combinable Crops Scheme Standards, which is needed to meet the best prices for crops.

Page 148

4.15 It is suspected that crops were stored in the unsuitable buildings, possibly only for

limited periods, and those crops for which there was inadequate space would probably have been sold directly as they were harvested, with associated price penalties, or they might have been moved to central co-operative type facilities.

4.16 The existing, somewhat ageing, other buildings are in poor repair and are generally

too low for access by modern tractors and other farm machinery. As space is available in the proposed building, it will be used for safe and secure parking of the full range of valuable arable farm machinery.

5. RELEVANT SITE HISTORY 5.1 UTT/0314/90 - Change of use of redundant building from agricultural to light

industrial use. Erection of an agricultural workshop and general purpose building general farm storage and machinery maintenance. Approved with conditions.

5.2 UTT/0596/79 - Erection of an agricultural workshop and general purpose building

general farm storage and machinery maintenance. Approved with conditions 5.3 UTT/13/0368/AG - Grain Drier and Associated Equipment. Deemed Permitted 5.4 UTT/1338/85 - Proposed erection of an agricultural storage building. Approved with

conditions 5.5 UTT/1442/87 - Erection of agricultural storage building. Approved with conditions 6. POLICIES 6.1 National Policies - National Planning Policy Framework 6.2 Uttlesford Local Plan (2005) - S7 – The Countryside - GEN2 - Design - GEN7 - Biodiversity - GEN1 - Access - GEN4 – Good Neighbours - GEN8 - Vehicle Parking Standards 7. TOWN COUNCIL COMMENTS 7.1 Great Dunmow Town Council supports this application. 8. CONSULTATIONS N/A

Page 149

9. REPRESENTATIONS 9.1 Eight neighbouring properties were notified and the application advertised. No

representations have been received. Expiry date 13th October 2016 10. APPRAISAL The issues to consider in the determination of the application are: A Design, scale, and impact on character of the countryside (ULP Policies S7 and

GEN2); B Whether there would be harm to the amenity of neighbouring properties (ULP

Policies GEN2 and GEN4). C Highway safety (GEN1) D Biodiversity (GEN7) A Design, scale , impact on character of the countryside ( ULP Policies S7 and

GEN2); 10.1 The application site is located beyond development limits where the countryside

should be protected for its own sake in accordance with Policy S7 and principles of rural restraint. However, it is recognised that agricultural development is generally acceptable in the countryside. The proposed building, although large, would be positioned alongside the south east of the existing hangar and grain store, with its front elevation aligned with the south-west gable end of the hangar, in this way the visual impact of the building from the road would be reduced as it would be shielded to some extent by the existing buildings. The buildings would be well sited and related to the existing buildings and the materials are of a traditional agricultural building. Recognising the agricultural need put forward by the applicant, it is considered that the building would be acceptable. As such, the building by reason of its size and site positioning would not give rise to significant harm to the character of the rural landscape at this location and would comply with the aims of ULP policy S7.

10.2 The access to the building is via an existing access which is considered to be adequate for the proposed use of the building.

B Whether there would be harm to the amenity of neighbouring properties (ULP

Policies GEN2 and GEN4). 10.3 The proposed building is sited away from residential properties and as such the

proposal would not result in any material detrimental impact to neighbours amenity. and would comply with ULP policies GEN2 and GEN4

C Highway safety (GEN1) 10.4 The proposal would use the existing access and would comply with policy GEN1.

There is a large area of hardstanding between the existing buildings and the road which is in the same ownership and would provide adequate parking if necessary.

D Biodiversity (GEN7) 10.5 Policy GEN7 of the Local Plan states that development that would have a harmful

effect on wildlife will not be permitted unless the need for the development outweighs the importance of the feature of nature conservation. Where the site

Page 150

includes protected species, measures to mitigate and/or compensate for the potential impacts of development must be secured. The applicant has submitted a completed biodiversity questionnaire, and all of the questions were answered with a no. The barn is to be sited on an area of land that has been regularly mowed and adjacent to an agricultural field that has been regularly cultivated. As such it is not considered that the proposal would have any material detrimental impact in respect of protected species and that the proposal complies with policy GEN7

11. CONCLUSION The following is a summary of the main reasons for the recommendation: 11.1 The new building would allow the farm holding to meet current agricultural

requirements whilst not harming the character of the countryside or the amenity of neighbouring properties.

RECOMMENDATION – APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS Conditions 1. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of 3 years

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

2. Before development commences details of materials to be used in the construction

of the external surfaces of the development hereby permitted have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The development/works shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details. Subsequently, the external surfaces shall not be changed without the prior written consent of the local planning authority. REASON: To ensure a satisfactory standard of development in the interests of visual amenity in accordance with Uttlesford Local Plan (adopted 2005) Policy GEN2 JUSTIFICATION: The details of materials would need to be submitted for approval prior to the commencement of the development to ensure that the resulting appearance of the development is safeguarded and the amenity of the surrounding locality is protected.

Page 151

Application no.: UTT/16/2492/FUL

Address: Dunmow Farm, The Broadway, Dunmow

© Crown copyright and database rights 2016 Ordnance Survey 0100018688

Organisation: Uttlesford District Council

Department: Planning

Date: 02 November 2016

Page 152

UTT/16/2432/HHF (Farnham)

(Referred to Committee by Cllr Councillor Janice Loughlin. Reason: concerns relating to impact on neighbouring properties, in particular overlooking and loss of light)

PROPOSAL: Demolition of detached workshop and erection of two storey side

and single storey rear extensions LOCATION: 6 Thrimley Lane, Farnham, CM23 1HX APPLICANT: Mrs Carol Philpott AGENT: Mr Danny Sutton EXPIRY DATE: 25.11.2016 CASE OFFICER: Philip Freeman Bentley

1. NOTATION 1.1 None. 2. DESCRIPTION OF SITE 2.1 The site is located to the north of Thrimley Lane and comprises a semi-detached

two-storey dwellinghouse fronting the public highway. The dwellinghouse has a pitched roof and is finished with facing brick and roof tiles. There is a detached garage/workshop to its northwest.

2.2 The site covers a total area of approximately 0.05 hectares. It includes a rear garden and an area for parking to the front and side of the dwellinghouse. The side and rear boundary treatments consist of wood panel fencing and mature vegetation.

2.3 The subject dwellinghouse is attached to and shares the same building line with another dwellinghouse to the east (number 5 Thrimley Lane). Numbers 7 and 8 Thrimley Lane adjoin to the north.

2.4 Although the subject dwellinghouse is part of a group of similar semi-detached dwelling houses, a number of these have been subject to extensions and alterations. Most notably, numbers 2, 4 and 5 Thrimley Lane have had two-storey side extensions.

2.5 Two Grade II listed buildings, Thrimley House and Dovecote to the North East of Thrimley House, are located opposite the subject site.

2.6 It is noted that there is a mistake on the submitted Location and Proposed Site Plans in relation to the length of the detached garage at number 7 Thrimley Lane; however, this is not significant enough to prevent a proper assessment of the proposal.

3. PROPOSAL 3.1 The proposal is for the demolition of the detached garage/workshop to the northwest

of the house and the erection of a two-storey side and single-storey rear extension.

Page 153

The proposal would also include the demolition of a small existing single-storey side element.

3.2 The two-storey side extension would be approximately 8 metres deep, 5.3 metres wide and up to 7 metres in height. The proposed single-storey rear extension would be 3.5 metres deep, 6.2 metres wide and up to 3.5 metres in height.

3.3 The proposed materials would, on the whole, match the existing materials. 4. APPLICANT’S CASE 4.1 The applicant did not submit a case. 5. RELEVANT SITE HISTORY 5.1 There is no relevant, recent planning history. 6. POLICIES 6.1 National Policies - National Planning Policy Framework 6.2 Uttlesford Local Plan (2005) - Policy S7 – The Countryside - Policy GEN2 – Design - Policy GEN7 – Nature Conservation - Policy GEN8 – Vehicle Parking Standards - Policy ENV2 – Development affecting Listed Buildings - Policy H8 – Homes Extensions 6.3 Supplementary Planning Policy - Essex Design Guide (2005) - The Essex County Council Parking Standards Design and Good Practice

(September 2009) - Uttlesford Local Residential Parking Standards (February 2013) 7. PARISH COUNCIL COMMENTS 7.1 None - expired 28/09/2016. 8. CONSULTATIONS ECC Transportation, Planning and Development 8.1 The public footpath would not be affected by the proposed development, however

an informative is suggested. ECC Ecology Consultant 8.2 No objections.

Page 154

9. REPRESENTATIONS 9.1 Four representations were received in response to letters to neighbours (expired

21/09/2016). All four were objections. The comments are summarised as follows:

• In relation to the kitchen, living room, main bedroom and garden of number 7 Thrimley Lane, the two-storey side extension would cause a loss of light and view and an overbearing impact.

• In relation to the bedroom, lounge, south patio and rear garden of number 8 Thrimley Lane, the two-storey side extension would result in overlooking and a loss of light.

• In relation to the rear kitchen window of number 5 Thrimley Lane, the single-storey rear extension would cause an overbearing effect and a loss of light and overshadowing.

• The foundations of the proposed development would have an impact on neighbouring property.

• The proposed garage/workshop could be used for commercial purposes.

• The proposed extension would affect the public footpath.

• The proposed extension would interfere with television signal for number 8 Thrimley Lane.

9.2 It is noted that some of the representations were accompanied by drawings that

were intended to illustrate the points made. 9.3 Specific comments on matters that are not addressed in the appraisal section are

set out below:

• Issues related to the impact of new development on neighbouring foundations are normally a civil matter and not a planning consideration.

• The proposed garage/workshop would replace an existing garage/workshop; there is no reason to believe that either the existing or the proposed would be used for purposes other than those ancillary to the residential use of the dwellinghouse.

• ECC has confirmed that the development would not affect the public footpath and it is considered that there would be no material impact. An informative is recommended, should the application be approved.

• It is not considered that a building of the scale proposed would have a material impact on the ability of neighbouring properties to receive television signal.

9.4 Otherwise, where relevant, comments on representations are included in the

planning considerations text below 10. APPRAISAL The issues to consider in the determination of the application are: A Whether the principle of the proposal within the countryside is acceptable (ULP

Policy S7). B Whether the proposed works would be of an appropriate design and scale,

respecting the character and appearance of the surrounding area and the original dwelling (ULP Policies GEN2 and H8).

C Whether the proposal would adversely affect amenity values of neighbouring residents (ULP Policies GEN2 and H8).

D Whether the proposal would cause an unacceptable level of harm to the setting of listed buildings (ENV2).

Page 155

E Whether the proposal would provide adequate levels of on-site car parking (ULP Policy GEN8).

F Whether the proposal would have a harmful effect on wildlife (ULP Policy GEN7). A Whether the principle of the proposal within the countryside is acceptable

(ULP Policy S7). 10.1 The subject site is located within the countryside. Local Plan Policy S7 protects the

countryside for its own sake and places strict control on new building. It only permits development that either needs to take place in the countryside or is appropriate to rural areas, and requires that the appearance of development protects or enhances the particular character of the part of the countryside within which it is set or that there are special reasons why the development in the form proposed needs to be there. The NPPF generally supports sustainable development in rural areas.

10.2 The principle of limited extensions to existing dwellinghouses is normally accepted

as a sustainable form of development and considered compliant with Local Plan Policy S7. However, this is subject to design being acceptable. This matter is discussed in more detail below.

B Whether the proposed works would be of an appropriate design and scale,

respecting the character and appearance of the surrounding area and the original dwelling (ULP Policies GEN2 and H8).

10.3 Local Plan Policy GEN2 sets out general design criteria for new development and in

particular requires that development is compatible with the scale, form, layout, appearance and materials of surrounding buildings. Local Plan Policy H8 states that home extensions will be permitted if their scale, design and external materials respect those of the original building. Paragraph 64 of the NPPF complements this policy by resisting poor design and the Home Extensions SPD (2005) sets out more detailed design guidance.

10.4 Although it is large, the proposed two-storey side extension would, on balance,

respect the character and appearance of the original house. Indeed, there is a large proposed set-back between the front wall of the original house and the front wall of the side extension, as well as a large set-down between the ridge height of the original house and ridge height of the proposed side extension. The public footpath to the west of the site would ensure that the existing levels of openness would not be unduly diminished.

10.5 The proposed single-storey rear extension would be generally acceptable in terms

of its design and scale, in keeping with the original house. It would not be prominently visible from either the public highway or the public footpath due to its proposed location and boundary screening.

10.6 The proposed materials specified on the drawings would be generally acceptable

and should be secured using a condition if approval is granted. 10.7 In accordance with the Essex Design Guide (2005), the Council normally requires

100sqm of private (in most cases rear) garden space for houses with three or more bedrooms. The proposal would lead to a small reduction in the amount of rear garden space, but this would be fairly insignificant in the context of the overall site.

C Whether the proposal would adversely affect amenity values of neighbouring

residents (ULP Policies GEN2 and H8).

Page 156

10.8 Local Plan Policy GEN2 sets out general design criteria for new development and in

particular requires that development does not cause an unacceptable loss of privacy, loss of daylight, overbearing impact or overshadowing to neighbouring residential properties. Policy H8 states that home extensions will be permitted if there would be no material overlooking or overshadowing of nearby properties and would not have an overbearing effect on neighbouring properties. The Home Extensions SPD (2005) sets out more detailed design guidance.

10.9 The proposed single-storey rear extension would, on balance, have an acceptable

impact on the amenity of number 5 Thrimley Lane. Although the single-storey rear extension would fail the daylight assessment criteria set out in the Home Extensions SPD, it is considered that this would not be unduly harmful in relation to the nearest ground-floor rear window of number 5 Thrimley Lane (understood to be kitchen window). This is because the proposed rear extension is only single storey and its impact on daylight and outlook would be minimal over and above that of the existing boundary hedge.

10.10 It is considered that, due to the level of separation between the front elevations and

gardens of numbers 7 and 8 Thrimley Lane and the proposed two-storey side extension, there would be no undue harm to the amenity values of these properties in terms of loss of daylight, overbearing or overshadowing. This is despite the fact that the proposed side extension would be sited to the front of both properties; the front elevations of these properties are understood to have windows serving habitable rooms.

10.11 In relation to overlooking, it is not considered that there would be any undue

negative impact. In particular, whilst it is recognised that there would be a new rear facing window in the form of a Juliet balcony, it is noted that this would not have a direct relationship with the front garden or windows in the front elevation of number 8 Thrimley Lane and that the rear garden of the same house would be a reasonable distance away.

D Whether the proposal would cause an unacceptable level of harm to the

setting of listed buildings (ENV2). 10.12 Local Plan Policy ENV2 requires that development affecting the setting of a listed

building is in keeping with its scale, character and surroundings, which is consistent with the relevant guidance set out within the NPPF and legislation.

10.13 It is noted that two Grade II listed buildings, Thrimley House and Dovecote to the

North East of Thrimley House, are located opposite the subject site. However, due to the levels of separation involved and screening provided by trees and a boundary wall along the south side of Thrimley Lane, it is not considered that there would be any material impact on the setting of these listed buildings.

E Whether the proposal would provide adequate levels of on-site car parking

(ULP Policy GEN8). 10.14 Local Plan Policy GEN8 only supports development that would provide for vehicle

parking places that are appropriate for the location in terms of number, design and layout. The Essex County Council Parking Standards Design and Good Practice (September 2009) and the Uttlesford Local Residential Parking Standards (February 2013) have both been adopted by the Council to provide further guidance.

Page 157

10.15 The proposal would result in the creation of an additional bedroom, meaning that the dwellinghouse would have a total of four bedrooms. Normally the Council would require three car parking spaces for a four-bedroom house. It is noted that it has been demonstrated that there would be room to park three cars on-site – one within the garage/workshop and two on to the front of the proposed two-storey side extension.

F Whether the proposal would have a harmful effect on wildlife (ULP Policy

GEN7). 10.16 Local Plan Policy GEN7 does not permit development that would have a harmful

effect on wildlife. 10.17 The development includes the demolition of the existing garage/workshop and a

single-storey side element. ECC’s Ecology Consultant has not objected to the proposal. However, whilst the proposed demolition is minor and is unlikely to have an undue impact on wildlife, it is considered that an informative should be added to alert the applicant to their responsibilities in relation to bats, should the application be approved.

11. CONCLUSION The following is a summary of the main reasons for the recommendation: A The principle of the development is deemed to be acceptable, in accordance with

the National Planning Policy Framework and ULP Policy S7.

B The design of the development would be acceptable and accord with ULP Policies GEN2 and H8, subject to a condition.

C The proposed development would have an acceptable impact on the amenity values

of neighbouring residents and accord with ULP Policy GEN2 and H8. D The proposal would have an acceptable impact on the setting of nearby listed

buildings and accord with ULP Policy ENV2. E On-site car parking would be acceptable and accord with ULP Policy GEN8. F The proposal would have an acceptable impact on wildlife and accord with ULP

Policy GEN7. RECOMMENDATION – APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS Conditions 1. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of 3 years

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

2. The materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the

development hereby permitted shall be as detailed within the submitted application unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Page 158

REASON: In the interests of the appearance of the development in accordance with Policies GEN2 and H8 of the Uttlesford Local Plan (adopted 2005) and the National Planning Policy Framework.

Page 159

Application no.: UTT/16/2042/HHF

Address: 1 Woodfields, Stansted

© Crown copyright and database rights 2016 Ordnance Survey 0100018688

Organisation: Uttlesford District Council

Department: Planning

Date: 02 November 2016

Page 160

UTT/16/2042/HHF (Stansted Mountfitchet)

(Referred to Committee by Cllr Dean. Reason: The visual impact of the fence affects the street scene in the conservation area)

PROPOSAL: Retrospective application for the erection of one metre high

fencing adjacent to highway LOCATION: 1 Woodfields, Stansted, CM24 8AL APPLICANT: Ms Lynn Yeomans EXPIRY DATE: 20th November 2016 CASE OFFICER: Sarah Marshall

1. NOTATION 1.1 Within development limits, part of the site falls within conservation area. 2. DESCRIPTION OF SITE 2.1 The application site is an elevated site on the south western corner of the

intersection of Woodfields and Chapel Hill. The site is a triangular parcel of land with the dwelling being an end of terraced dwelling with the amenity space to the side within the smaller part of the triangle. The site has a high retaining wall which varies in height due to the topography of Chapel Hill. On top of the retaining wall is a closed boarded fence which is subject to this application.

2.2 The application site is on Woodfields which is a narrow residential street and Chapel

Hill is a busy road which links the two distinct areas of Stansted Mountfitchet with a mixture of commercial, educational and residential along it. There is a mixture of enclosures within the area.

3. PROPOSAL 3.1 The proposal is to retain the closed boarded fence which has been erected atop an

existing retaining wall which is adjacent to Woodfields. 4. APPLICANT’S CASE 4.1 Application supported by;

- Photographs of the fence - Location and block plans

5. RELEVANT SITE HISTORY 5.1 No relevant planning history for this site. 6. POLICIES 6.1 National Policies

Page 161

- National Planning Policy Framework 6.2 Uttlesford Local Plan (2005) - S1 Settlement Boundaries for the Main Urban Areas

- GEN2 Design - ENV1 Design of development within Conservation Areas - GEN1 Access

7. TOWN COUNCIL COMMENTS 7.1 Town council have no comment to make on this planning application. 8. CONSULTATIONS Highways 8.1 From a highway and transportation perspective the Highway Authority has no

comments to make on this proposal as it is not contrary to the relevant transportation policies contained within the highways Authority’s Development Management Policies, adopted as County Council Supplementary Guidance in February 2011 and Uttlesford Local Plan Policy GEN1. Informative There are no highway authority issues associated with this proposal as it is served off a private road.

9. REPRESENTATIONS 9.1 A site notice was put up and 6 neighbourhood letters were sent out. The Council

received 2 responses in relation to this application. These responses are objecting to the application for the following reasons:

• The height of the fence is higher than what is stated in the application due to the existing wall;

• The site falls within the Conservation Area which is subject to an Article 4 direction and this fence is harmful to the character of the area;

• The fence is not in keeping with the immediate area;

• The fence blocks views from neighbouring properties;

• The fence causes overshadowing of the road and creates tunnel effect;

• It will cause precedence for other properties within the area. 10. APPRAISAL The issues to consider in the determination of the application are: A The visual impact of the fence on the character and appearance of the location (S1,

ENV1 and GEN2) B Impact on the residential amenities (GEN2) C The impact of the fence on the highway safety (GEN1) A The visual impact of the fence on the character and appearance of the

location (S1, ENV1 and GEN2)

Page 162

10.1 Policy S1 states that development within the built up areas will be permitted where it is within keeping with the surrounding developments. Policy GEN2 states that development should be compatible with the scale, form, appearance and materials of surrounding buildings. The location of high closed boarded fence is situated on an elevated corner site of the intersection of Woodfields and Chapel Hill. Chapel Hill is a relatively steep road which slopes upwards southeast to northwest and as such the site is in a prominent and highly visible position from both directions of Chapel Hill. Due to the lay of the land the fence, whilst it has a modest height appears higher due to the retaining wall which it sits on. It is considered that the visual appearance could be softened and made appropriate for the area through conditioning any approval which will reduce the visual impact of the fence on the surrounding location.

10.2 The erection of the fence is for a side garden which has now resulted in an area of

useable private outdoor amenity space for the occupants of the host dwelling. 10.3 The site is located just within the Conservation Area and policy ENV1 of the

Uttlesford Local Plan states that development within the Conservation Area should protect and enhance the character of the area. It is considered that the fence, subject to a condition to stain it black will result in an acceptable form of development which does not impact on the character of the conservation area. It should be noted that the fence, if it was set back from the retaining wall could be erected without the requirement of planning permission.

B Impact on the residential amenities (GEN2) 10.4 Policy GEN2 of the Uttlesford Local Plan states that development should not cause

any overshadowing or be an overbearing form of development. The fence is situated along a shared boundary with 21 Chapel Hill known as Barley Mow which is set lower than the application site. However, between the dwelling at 21 Chapel Hill and the boundary is a dual pitched garage and a driveway and as such it is not considered that this will cause any loss of light or be an overbearing form of development. With regards to the properties on the opposite side of the intersection of Woodfield and Chapel Hill this will not cause any detrimental harm to the residential amenities due to the setback.

C The impact of the fence on the highway safety (GEN1) 10.5 Essex County Highways have been consulted on this application and have not

raised a concern regarding the fence and the impact it would have on highways safety. It is considered that this development accords with Policy GEN1 of the Uttlesford Local Plan.

11. CONCLUSION The following is a summary of the main reasons for the recommendation: A The fence is not considered to detrimentally harm the character and appearance of

the surrounding location and protects the character and appearance of the conservation area. As such the development, subject to conditions is appropriate for the site and accords with policies S1, GEN2 and ENV1 of the Uttlesford Local Plan.

B Due to the position of the fence does not cause any overshadowing or be an overbearing form of development which would have a detrimental impact on the

Page 163

residential amenities of the neighbouring properties. Therefore the development accords with Policy GEN2 of the Uttlesford Local Plan.

C Due to the position of the fence and the setbacks from the carriage way the fence will not impact on the safety of the highways and therefore is accords with Policy GEN1 of the Uttlesford Local Plan.

RECOMMENDATION – APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS Conditions 1. The fence hereby approved shall be stained black within 3 months of the date of the

decision and retained hereafter unless otherwise approved in writing by the local planning authority. REASON: In the interests of the appearance of the development in accordance with Policies GEN2 and ENV1 of the Uttlesford Local Plan (adopted 2005).

Page 164

Application no.: UTT/16/2042/HHF

Address: 1 Woodfields, Stansted

© Crown copyright and database rights 2016 Ordnance Survey 0100018688

Organisation: Uttlesford District Council

Department: Planning

Date: 02 November 2016

Page 165

Page 166

UTT/16/2793/NMA (Saffron Walden)

(Referred to Committee Reason: Council’s own development)

PROPOSAL: Non Material Amendment to UTT/13/0263/DC- Insertion of 3 no. windows to end elevation of workshop.

LOCATION: Council Depot Shire Hill Saffron Walden, Essex CB11 3AQ APPLICANT: Mrs N Wittman AGENT: Mrs S Friend EXPIRY DATE: 24 November 2016 CASE OFFICER: Emmanuel Allanah

1. NOTATION 1.1 Within Settlement boundary. 2. DESCRIPTION OF SITE 2.1 The application site is an industrial building located within

Shire Hill Industrial Estate. The site is located off the main Saffron Walden to Thaxted road. The surrounding area consists of a range of industrial and commercial buildings all of differing styles and sizes.

3. PROPOSAL 3.1 Non-Material Amendment to UTT/13/0263/DC-Insertion of 3 no. windows to end

elevation of workshop. 4. APPLICANT’S CASE 4.1 The insertion of 3 no windows to end elevation of workshop to enable the creation of

additional office space. 5. RELEVANT SITE HISTORY 5.1 UTT/13/0263/DC - Approve with condition. The insertion of 3 no. windows in the

northern elevation of the building. 6. POLICIES 6.1 National Policies

- National Planning Policy Framework

6.2 Section 96A of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. 6.3 Section 96A allows a non-material amendment to be made to an existing planning

permission via a simple application procedure with a quick decision time.

Page 167

7. APPRAISAL The issues to consider in the determination of the application is: 7.1 Whether the proposed changes of non-material amendment is deemed non-material

within the meaning of Section 96A of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. 7.2 In response to the provisions of the Section 96A of the Town and Country Planning

Act 1990, the application is to be assessed to ascertain as to whether the proposed changes constitutes a non-material amendment to the approved development

8. CONCLUSION 8.1 The proposed changes are insertion of 3 no. windows to end elevation of workshop

to enable the creation of additional office space. 8.2 The proposed amendment to the previously approved scheme is minor in nature to

the building and it would not harm the amenity or character of the area. The position of one window is to be moved over a number of metres as it is to be located within a different room on the first floor. The reason is to change the window position from one room to another on the mezanine floor.

8.3 The proposed changes are therefore deemed non-material within the meaning of

Section 96A of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. 9. RECOMMENDATION 9.1 Approve non-material amendment.

Page 168

Application no.: UTT/16/2793/NMA

Address: Council Depot, Shire Hill, Saffron Walden

© Crown copyright and database rights 2016 Ordnance Survey 0100018688

Organisation: Uttlesford District Council

Department: Planning

Date: 02 November 2016

Page 169

Page 170

Committee: Planning Agenda Item

5 Date: 16 November 2016

Title: UTT/16/3002/TCA; Fell 2 no. Twisted Willow; 1no. Bay Laurel; 1no. Prunus sp. Corn Cottage, 47 Mill End, Thaxted

Author: Nigel Brown

Development Manager

Summary An application was submitted on 17th October 2016 by Mr B Smeeden of Corn Cottage, 47 Mill End, Thaxted, CM6 2LT for consent to carry out the following works at that property:

• Fell 2 no. Twisted Willows

• Fell 1 no. Bay Laurel

• Fell 1 no. Prunus spp. The trees are located in the Thaxted Conservation Area. The application relates to proposed works to a property in the ownership of member of staff. Recommendations:

It is recommended that no objection be raised for the proposed works Financial Implications There are no costs associated with the recommendation. Background Papers UTT/16/3002/TCA Impact

Communication/Consultation

None

Community Safety None

Equalities None

Health and Safety None

Human Rights/Legal Implications

None

Page 171

Sustainability None

Ward-specific impacts None

Workforce/Workplace None

Background An application was submitted on 17th October 2016 by Mr B Smeeden of Corn Cottage, 47 Mill End, Thaxted, CM6 2LT for consent to carry out the following works at that property:

• Fell 2 no. Twisted Willows

• Fell 1 no. Bay Laurel

• Fell 1 no. Prunus spp. The trees are located in the Thaxted Conservation Area. Stated Reason for Works The reasons given are as follows: No written reasons were provided Representations No representations have been made at the time of writing this report. Comment Photographs provided by the applicant (and verified by a site visit on 26th October 2016) showed that the two willows are growing in very close proximity to brick built structures (garden wall & house) and the bay laurel is encroaching very heavily on the single storey rear extension. These three trees have potential to cause structural damage to this Grade II listed property, if they have not already done so. The Prunus, a relatively poor specimen, has outgrown its position in what is a very small garden. It is therefore our recommendation that the work may proceed. Decision That the works may proceed. Recommendations It is recommended the applicant is informed they may go ahead with the proposed works provided it is carried out within two years of the notice date. It is recommended that all works to be carried out in accordance with BS 3998: 2010 If you are instructing others to carry out works to trees or if you carry out these works yourself, you are required by law to consider the potential of these works affecting wildlife. Birds are protected by the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended). The bird nesting season runs from April until August and ideally tree works should be completed outside these times. If

Page 172

this is not possible then the tree/s should be checked for nesting birds prior to any works commencing. Rare species (bats, otters, dormice, sand lizards, smooth snakes and great crested newts) have additional protection under the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 (as amended). It is an offence to disturb damage or destroy these species or their habitats, even if their habitats (nest sites, breeding sites or feeding areas) are not in use at the time. Incidental damage (due to inadequate checks) as a result of a legitimate forestry or arboricultural operation can no longer be held as a defence and if in doubt a licence should be sought from Natural England (0845 6014523) prior to the commencement of any works on site Risk Analysis

1.

Risk Likelihood Impact Mitigating actions

1 1 1 None

1 = Little or no risk or impact 2 = Some risk or impact – action may be necessary. 3 = Significant risk or impact – action required 4 = Near certainty of risk occurring, catastrophic effect or failure of project.

Page 173

Page 174

Page 175

Page 176

Page 177

Page 178

Item 6 - Appeal Decisions

SITE ADDRESS APPLICATION NO DESCRIPTION APPEAL DATE & DECISION

DECISION BY OFFICER/OVERTURNED BY COMMITTEE

Land West of Great Dunmow Stortford Road Great Dunmow Essex

UTT/13/1043/OP Outline planning application with the details of external access committed. Appearance, landscaping, layout (including internal access), and scale reserved for later determination. Development to comprise: between 600 and 700 dwellings (Use Class C3); up to 19,300 sq m gross of additional development (including the change of use of existing buildings on site where these are retained) for Use Classes: A1, A2, A3, A4, A5 (retail); B1(a)(offices); C2 (residential institutions care home); D1, D2 (leisure and community uses); car parking; energy centre; and for the laying out of the buildings, routes, open spaces and public realm and landscaping within the development; and all associated works and operations including but not limited to: demolition; earthworks; and engineering operations.

Appeal Dismissed 25.08.2016

Refused

Fairfield Site Station Road Elsenham Bishops Stortford Hertfordshire

UTT/13/0808/OP Outline application with all matters reserved, except access, for up to 800 dwellings; up to 0.5ha of class B1a and B1c employment uses; up to 1,400sqm of retail uses; a primary school; up to 640sqm of Health Centre use; up to 600sqm of community buildings; changing rooms; access roads including access points to B1051 Henham Road and Old Mead Road, a construction access and haul route from B1051 Henham Road, a Waste Water Treatment Works access from Bedwell Road, and provision of a link road at Elsenham Cross between the B1051 Henham Road and Hall Road; a Waste Water Treatment Works and other associated infrastructure, landscaping and boundary

Appeal Dismissed 25.08.2016

N/A

Page 179

treatment works. Demolition of all existing buildings.

Land West Of Ford Farm Braintree Road Great Dunmow Essex

UTT/15/2274/FUL Proposed erection of pair of private dwellings with garaging and associated landscaping

Appeal Dismissed 25.07.2016

N/A

Land South Of Kinvara Business Centre Gransmore Green Lane Felsted Essex

UTT/16/0059/OP Outline application, with all matters reserved except for access, for the erection of 3 dwellings with associated access and parking

Appeal Allowed 21.07.2016

N/A

Land At Old Telephone Exchange Weaverhead Lane Thaxted Essex CM6 2LE

UTT/15/3206/FUL Construction of 2 New Residential Dwellings Appeal Dismissed 26.08.2016

N/A

Page 180

Taylors Service Centres Ltd 1 - 3 Chelmsford Road Industrial Estate Dunmow Essex

UTT/16/0228/FUL Single storey extension to south west facing elevation providing covered car showroom display area

Appeal Allowed 29.09.2016

N/A

11 Broom Farm Road Elsenham Essex CM22 6LD

UTT/15/3760/FUL Proposed new dwelling

Appeal Allowed 02.08.2016

N/A

Land South Of Oakhanger Friars Lane Hatfield Heath Hertfordshire

UTT/15/3816/FUL Erection of 7 no. dwellings including new road and associated landscaping

Appeal Dismissed 28.07.2016

N/A

Land East Of Glebe Cottages Royston Road Wendens Ambo Essex

UTT/15/3031/OP Outline application with all matters reserved except for access for the erection of 1 no. dwelling and garage

Appeal Dismissed 13.09.2016

N/A

1 Waterbutt Row Cambridge Road Quendon Saffron Walden

UTT/15/3016/LB Replace timber cladding to exterior walls of rear extension, replace windows to side and rear of property, replace side access door and replace 2 no. interior doors in rear extension.

Appeal Allowed 19.10.2016

N/A

Barn At Charlflo Farm Pepples Lane Wimbish Saffron Walden

UTT/15/1971/PAP3Q

Prior notification of proposed change of use of agricultural building to dwelling

Appeal Allowed 12.07.2016

N/A

Page 181

Snow Hill Nursery Dunmow Road Great Easton Essex CM6 2DR

UTT/15/3599/FUL Demolition of existing buildings and structures, erection of no. 2 dwellings with detached garages

Appeal Allowed 02.08.2016

N/A

Land Adj Three Horse Shoes Bannister Green Felsted Essex CM6 3ND

UTT/15/3467/FUL Erection of 1 no. two bedroom dwelling with associated access

Appeal Allowed 16.08.2016

N/A

Land At Cedar House Broad Green Chrishall Essex SG8 8QR

UTT/15/3231/FUL Erection of one dwelling Appeal Dismissed 13.10.2016

N/A

Land Rear Of Hill Top Yard Mill Road Henham Bishops Stortford

UTT/15/0623/FUL Proposed change of use from haulage yard to gypsy site for 5 no. pitches with toilet block

Appeal Dismissed 13.09.2016

N/A

Woodbine Cottage Church Lane White Roding Essex CM6 1RN

UTT/15/3462/HHF Proposed demolition of existing double garage and erection of replacement outbuilding/garage.

Appeal Dismissed 31.08.2016

N/A

Margaret’s Cottage Park Road Little Easton Essex CM6 2

UTT/16/0069/HHF Proposed two storey side extension. Appeal Allowed 03.08.2016

Page 182

Land Adj Orchard House Walden Road Ashdon Saffron Walden Essex CB10 2HJ

UTT/15/3747/OP

Outline application, with all matters reserved except for access, for 1 no. dwelling with garage and new access for existing property

Appeal Allowed 23.09.2016

N/A

Land Adj Orchard House Walden Road Ashdon Saffron Walden Essex CB10 2HJ

UTT/15/3747/OP Outline application, with all matters reserved except for access, for 1 no. dwelling with garage and new access for existing property

Appeal Allowed 23.09.2016

N/A

Midden Top Road Wimbish Essex CB10 2XJ

UTT/15/3512/FUL New dwelling, garage, drive and vehicular crossover

Appeal Dismissed N/A

Land Adjacent Sargents Lane Walden Road Hadstock Essex CB21 4PA

UTT/16/0331/FUL

1 no. new dwelling and cartlodge together with new access

Appeal Dismissed 01.11.2016

N/A

Barn At Grange Farm Sparrows Lane Hatfield Heath Bishops Stortford Hertfordshire CM22 7AU

UTT/15/2966/PAP3Q

Prior notification of change of use of agricultural building to 3 no. dwellings

Appeal Dismissed 18.10.2016

N/A

Page 183

The Old Chalk Pit Walden Road Great Chesterford Essex

UTT/15/3481/FUL Erection of 1 no,dwelling and garage and change of use to C3.

Appeal Dismissed 27.10.2016

N/A

First Floor 27 High Street Dunmow CM6 1AB

UTT/16/0791/AV Retention of fascia sign at 1st floor level Appeal Dismissed 13.09.2016

N/A

Dabbs House London Road Great Chesterford Essex CB10 1NY

UTT/16/0790/FUL Demolition of garage and erection of 1 no. dwelling and alterations to access

Appeal Allowed 31.10.2016

N/A

Rickling House Cambridge Road Quendon Essex CB11 3XJ

UTT/15/3702/HHF Retrospective planning permission for the erection of a galvanised steel palisade fence to the boundary perimeter.

Appeal Allowed 02.08.2016

N/A

Land South Of 1 Carters Hill Manuden Hertfordshire

UTT/15/1859/FUL Erection of 8 no. residential units and 4 no. low cost residential units with associated parking and landscaping

Appeal Dismissed 06.10.2016

N/A

Highcroft Keeres Green Aythorpe Roding Essex CM6 1PQ

UTT/16/0536/FUL Demolition of stable block, and erection of one dwelling

Appeal Allowed 16.08.2016

N/A

Page 184