ITEM NO:
Location:
Former Factory Site, Land on the north west side,
Blackhorse Road, Letchworth Garden City
Applicant:
Mr Ames
Letchworth Garden City Heritage Foundation and
Arkcade Ltd & Stanwick Ltd
Proposal:
Residential redevelopment of site to provide 159
dwellings comprising of 12 x 1 bedroom flats; 24 x 2
bedroom flats; 12 x 2 bedroom houses; 30 x 3 bedroom
houses and 81 x 4 bedroom houses. Two new vehicular
accesses onto Blackhorse Road following closure of
existing accesses; associated parking and internal
access roads, landscaping, amenity spaces and
ancillary works following demolition of existing factory
building. (As amended by plans received 1st, 7th and
14th August 2014)
Ref.No:
14/01403/ 1
Officer:
Chris Carter
10
Date of expiry of statutory period : 22 August 2014
Reason for Delay (if applicable)
N/A
Reason for Referral to Committee (if applicable)
Site Area
1.0
Relevant History
1.1
None relevant to this planning application.
2.0
Policies
2.1
North Hertfordshire District Local Plan No.2 with Alterations
Policy 8 - Development in Towns
2.2
North Hertfordshire District Local Plan No.2 with Alterations
Policy 16 - Areas of Archaeological Significance and other Archaeological
Areas
2.3
North Hertfordshire District Local Plan No.2 with Alterations
Policy 26 - Housing Proposals
2.4
North Hertfordshire District Local Plan No.2 with Alterations
PLANNING CONTROL (11.09.14)
Policy 29A - Affordable Housing for Urban Local Needs
2.5
North Hertfordshire District Local Plan No.2 with Alterations
Policy 37 - Business Uses (B1 Use Class)
2.6
North Hertfordshire District Local Plan No.2 with Alterations
Policy 51 - Development Effects and Planning Gain
2.7
North Hertfordshire District Local Plan No.2 with Alterations
Policy 55 - Car Parking Standards
2.8
North Hertfordshire District Local Plan No.2 with Alterations
Policy 57 - Residential Guidelines and Standards
2.9
North Hertfordshire District Local Plan No.2 with Alterations
Policy 58 Letchworth Garden City Design Principles
2.10
National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF)
4. Promoting sustainable transport
6. Delivering a wide choice of high quality homes
7. Requiring good design
8. Promoting healthy communities
10. Meeting the challenge of climate change, flooding and coastal change
11. Conserving and enhancing the natural environment
2.11
Vehicle Parking at New Development - NHDC Supplementary Planning Document
2011
2.12
Planning Obligations - NHDC Supplementary Planning Document 2006
3.0
Representations
3.1
There have been two consultations undertaken with regard to this planning
application, one at the start and one following the submission of amended plans
during the consideration of the application.
3.2
Anglian Water - No objection subject to a condition regarding the water strategy.
3.3
NHDC Environmental Protection - No objection to the proposed development
and the submitted reports represent an appropriate preliminary risk assessment.
Some issues remain outstanding and can be controlled by a suitably worded
condition.
3.4
NHDC Environmental Health - Raise an objection on the basis that there would be
unacceptable noise levels within the garden amenity areas of a number of properties
on the site.
PLANNING CONTROL (11.09.14)
3.5
NHDC Housing - Agree to the revised mix for affordable housing which fully meets
the Council's requirements in respect of rented and shared ownership units. No
objection
3.6
NHDC Landscape Designer - Raised a number of comments regarding hard and
soft landscaping as well as surfacing materials.
3.7
HCC Highways - Have assessed the application and recommended a number of
conditions.
3.8
HCC Development Services - No objection. Will seek planning obligations
contributions to a range of services.
3.9
HCC Archaeologist - No objection subject to recommended conditions
3.10
Hertfordshire Police - No objection. Would like to see the scheme meet Secured
by Design for the whole site and not just the affordable housing.
3.11
NHS England - No objection to the application but seek a planning obligations
payment towards increased General Practice provision.
3.12
North and East Hertfordshire Clinical Commissioning Group - Provide a range
of comments regarding patient capacity in the local area.
3.13
Environment Agency - No objection subject to recommended conditions.
3.14
Local Businesses - Representations have been received from three local
businesses which are located adjacent to the site. These are Chilfen Joinery, TTI
Group Surface Engineering and Heat Treatment and Hanmere Polythene.
Chilfen Joinery have written to raise concerns with regard to the relationship
between their operations at their existing sites on Flint Road, and their proposed new
site on the corner of Blackhorse Road and Flint Road, and the proposed residential
use. In particular they have raised their working practices in terms of hours of
operation and noise, and they express concern that they do not wish to be
considered a statutory noise nuisance in future which might impact on the way in
which they operate their business.
TTI have raised similar issues, noting that they operate without restrictions 24 hours
a day, seven days a week and are concerned that when residents along the
Blackhorse Road frontage open their windows, any noise mitigation measures will be
negated. They are concerned that they could end up in a situation where they are
subject to a noise abatement notice from the council.
Hanmere Polythene has stated that they do not believe that the site is suitable for
residential use. They consider that the access points to the site are dangerous due to
their proximity to the brow of the hill in the road and because delivery vehicles also
park along Blackhorse Road to deliver goods. The introduction of restrictions on the
road would also be unacceptable to local businesses. It is suggested that the access
points are relocated from Blackhorse Road. Concerns are also raised with regard to
disruption to utilities during construction. Hanmere operate 24/7 and if they lose
power then it is very costly and time consuming.
PLANNING CONTROL (11.09.14)
3.15
Local Residents - Representations have been received from 9 neighbouring
properties, numbers 40, 54A, 56, 62 and 68 Green Lane, numbers 40, 48, 78 and
90 Kristiansand Way. A representation has also been received from Transition
Towns Letchworth. Issues and concerns raised are:




















Density of development too high.
Increased traffic generation on Green Lane, abuse of the Green Lane weight
limit, difficult accessing driveways in Green Lane.
Concerns over detail of proposed boundary treatments.
Loss of grass, shrubs and trees on site.
Loss of trees and hedges to Kristiansand Way boundary.
Pressure on local schools and health services.
Loss of daylight and sunlight.
Questions regarding the adequacy of the transport assessment.
Impacts on wildlife on site.
Overlooking of properties on Green Lane.
Loss of view.
Concerns regarding noise levels for new residents.
Noise during construction.
Loss of property value.
Risk of increased anti-social behaviour.
Objection to the footpath access to Kristiansand Way.
Concerns regarding the legal status of the "amenity" strip on site.
Layout is car dominated.
Location of open spaces is poor, lack of play areas and allotments
Lack of sustainability measures.
4.0
Planning Considerations
4.1
Site & Surroundings
4.1.1 The application site is that of the former George King factory on the north west side of
Blackhorse Road, Letchworth Garden City.
4.1.2 The site is currently occupied by derelict factory and office buildings, a large area of
car parking to the rear and an area of grass and loose knit trees to the south west
boundary.
4.1.3 To the north west is the existing residential area of Kristiansand Way, to the south
west are established residential properties in Green Lane, to the north east is an area
of allotments and a number of industrial units along Flint Road and to the south and
south east are industrial units in Blackhorse Road.
4.2
Proposal
4.2.1 The scheme, as amended, seeks full planning permission for the residential
redevelopment of the site to provide 159 dwellings and 283 car parking spaces,
together with landscaping and ancillary works. The scheme comprises 12 x 1 bed
apartments, 24 x 2 bed apartments, 12 x 2 bed houses, 30 x 3 bed houses and 81 x
4 bed houses. The dwellinghouses would be predominantly two storey, although 24
units would be two and a half storey. The two blocks of apartments would be three
storey in height. 63 of the 159 dwellings would be affordable housing. The density of
the scheme is approximately 32 dwellings per hectare.
PLANNING CONTROL (11.09.14)
4.2.2 The site would be served by two vehicular access points from Blackhorse Road and
would feature three tree lined avenues running on a broadly north-south axis. These
avenues are joined by east-west routes which help to create a hierarchy of streets
within the site. In the north west corner of the site a bicycle and pedestrian link is
proposed which would join the site with the existing residential area of Kristiansand
Way.
4.2.3 The scheme proposes two areas of open space as well as increased density of
boundary planting along the Blackhorse Road boundary as well as some other areas
of the site. New and improved boundary fences are also proposed. At present there
are very few trees of any public amenity value on the site but it is proposed to
significantly increase the number as part of the overall 'Garden City' layout of the site.
4.3
Key Issues
4.3.1 Having regard to both local and national planning guidance, as well as
representations received from the public and statutory consultees, I consider the key
areas for consideration of this application are as follows:







Principle of Development
Design, Landscape and Sustainability
Noise and Odour
Parking, Traffic and Transport
Impacts on Existing and New Residents
Other Site Specific Considerations (Archaeology, Health)
Planning Obligations and Affordable Housing
Conclusions, on each key issue, are given in bold text for ease of reference.
4.3.2 Principle of Development
There are a number of factors to consider when establishing whether or not the
principle of residential development on this site is acceptable or not. Firstly, the site is
currently located in an area which is allocated for Business (B1) Use, in accordance
with Policy 37 of the 1996 Local Plan. This policy essentially stated the Council's
position at that time that business uses would be permitted within that area and that
non B1 uses would normally be resisted. Whilst Policy 37 is a 'saved' policy, it is
dated and has not been rigorously applied. This has resulted in a range of other, non
B1 uses, being introduced to the area.
4.3.3 Alongside consideration of local planning policy, the Council must also consider the
advice contained in the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF). Paragraph 22
of the NPPF states that "planning policies should avoid the long term protection of
sites allocated for employment use where there is no reasonable prospect of a site
being used for that purpose...... where there is no reasonable prospect of a site being
used for the allocated employment use, applications for alternative uses of land or
buildings should be treated on their merits having regard to market signals and the
relative need for different land uses to support sustainable local communities". This
government policy position sets out, quite clearly, the circumstances in which sites
such as this might be considered for alternative uses.
PLANNING CONTROL (11.09.14)
4.3.4 Having regard to paragraph 22 of the NPPF, consideration should be given to both
housing need, demand for this site and other available employment land in the
locality. Firstly, with regard to housing need, the Council's Annual Monitoring Report
(AMR) 2012-2013 (the most recent version) states that the district has between 2.32
and 2.94 years supply of housing land, well shortly of the government's requirement
of 5 years +- 5%. In my view, this alone is a principle reason for releasing this site for
residential development. Secondly, with regard to demand for this site and the
availability of other sites within Letchworth Garden City, for similar uses, it is noted
that the site has been vacant for a number of years with little prospect of use for B1
uses. Alongside this, the Council's most recent Employment Land Review (ELR)
states that there is a need to rationalise employment uses within Letchworth Garden
City, where there is an over-provision of land for these uses.
4.3.5 Having regard to the policy discussion outlined above, it is my view that there
should be no objection in principle to the release of this site from its current
B1 employment designation. The site is vacant, and has been for some time,
there is an over provision of similar land within Letchworth Garden City, there
is an identified need for more housing sites and the NPPF supports such
releases of land.
4.3.6 Design, Landscape and Sustainability
The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) advises at paragraph 58 that,
amongst other things, planning decisions should aim to ensure that developments
establish a strong sense of place, using streetscapes and buildings to create
attractive and comfortable places to live, work and visit. It is in the context of this
statement that the design of this scheme has evolved through the process of
pre-application advice with officers at NHDC, and extensive work between the
applicant and Letchworth Garden City Heritage Foundation. The result is a scheme
which provides an interpretation of the Garden City ethos of design with the use of
broad vistas, the use of closure and accents, as well as group design and open
spaces and creates a development that responds to the local character and history
and would feel part of the Garden City without simply replicating existing buildings.
4.3.7 Starting with consideration of the layout, and moving across the site from the south
west to the north east. The most south westerly run of dwellings, which would back
on to the gardens of properties in Green Lane, are all detached and create a rhythm
along the street with even spacing between the dwellings featuring driveways, front
gardens and tree planting. On the opposite side of the road there would be a more
substantial grass verge, in front of the dwellings, featuring feature tree planting, there
would then be slightly smaller front gardens before a run of semi detached and
detached dwellings, again fairly evenly spaced with driveways and garages.
4.3.8 The Blackhorse Road frontage would feature a landscaping buffer strip of between 5
and 15 metres and would be planted with a range of trees and shrubs as well as
grass. The dwellings along this side of the site would again be largely detached in
nature, although linked by single storey garages, and accessed from an internal
access road which would run parallel with Blackhorse Road. The two main access
points to the site from the wider highway network would also be taken from
Blackhorse Road.
PLANNING CONTROL (11.09.14)
4.3.9 The first access from Blackhorse Road would provide the principal spine road within
the centre of the site. This road would have a grass verge on either side with
pavement and an avenue of trees created. The westerly side if this avenue also
features a half moon shaped green with detached houses set back around the green.
This is a traditional Garden City feature and aims to replicate the kind of layout seen
elsewhere in Letchworth in places like Eastholm. The easterly side of this road also
predominantly features detached houses although there are also some semi
detached pairs. This central avenue leads through the site to the main southwest northeast route through the site.
4.3.10 The road which runs southwest - northeast across the top of the site features a mix of
detached and semi detached properties which back onto the gardens of existing
properties in Kristiansand Way. These properties again feature front gardens,
driveways and garages which are evenly spaced, although there is less tree planting
along this road which helps to re-enforce the hierarchy of streets within the site.
4.3.11 The second access from Blackhorse Road would run up the north western side of the
site to meet the southwest - northwest road and complete the circle around the site.
The dwellings along this road would be at a higher density than elsewhere on the site
and include semi detached pairs, terraces and the two blocks of apartments. There
would also be a smaller amenity green as well as small landscaped areas to the front
of the apartment buildings. Finally, there would also be a minor connecting road
between this road and the main avenue. This road would feature semi detached pairs
of dwellings and would act as a secondary route within the site.
4.3.12 In my view, the layout and mix of dwellings throughout the site is acceptable
and has some success in trying to create a traditional Garden City layout,
albeit with a large proportion of detached dwellings. The eastern side of the
site would be noticeably higher density development than elsewhere on the
site but I do not consider this to be detrimental to the scheme as a whole.
4.3.13 Turning to the design of the buildings themselves, the applicant has indicated in their
design and access statement that they have considered a range of buildings styles
and types from around Letchworth Garden City in the evolution of their house
designs. In my view, some of the proposed house types are far more successful than
others. Many of the existing Letchworth properties that are cited in the design and
access statement feature the extensive use of white or cream render. However only
two of the proposed house types are suggested to be rendered. This is unfortunate
but I can understand this approach in terms of maintenance of the properties moving
forward. There are many examples of where render has been used extensively on
new build developments but has quickly become tired and in need of maintenance.
All of the dwellings would have plain tiled roofs and the details of these tiles, and the
proposed bricks that has been provided by the applicant is acceptable in my view and
will be controlled by condition.
4.3.14 The larger of the proposed house types do, in my view, have more of a Garden City
appearance to them, whereas some of the smaller house types are less successful in
this regard. However all of the properties include features of Arts and Crafts design,
particularly with regard to roof form and materials.
4.3.15 The proposed apartment blocks also take on the Arts and Crafts theme. These
buildings would be finished with render and include the use of a series of cat slide
dormer windows and covered walkways. I consider that the design of the apartment
buildings is good and, whilst the buildings would be quite large, they will sit
comfortably on this side of the site. In conclusion, it is my view that the
appearance of the dwellings would be of good quality with strong features of
Garden City design, in accordance with Policy 58 of the Local Plan.
PLANNING CONTROL (11.09.14)
4.3.16 The issue of environmental sustainability of the proposed scheme is quite a
straightforward matter to deal with in my view. The site is located within the existing
urban area of Letchworth Garden City, is close to a bus route and is within walking
distance of the town centre and railway station. Further to this, and at the request of
Letchworth Garden City Heritage Foundation, the scheme has been designed to
meet Level 4 of the Code for Sustainable Homes. In my view, these factors taken
as a whole result in a scheme which would be sustainable in these terms. I am
aware that some representors would wish for the council to prescribe much tougher
targets for schemes such as this when considering the impacts of development on
climate change. However, in the absence of any policy basis for such requirements it
is not possible to justify a requirement for such measures. It is also noted that the
Police Architectural Liaison Officer has requested a condition to ensure that the
development meets Secured By Design standards. Whilst this is desirable, I am not
aware of any policy basis on which the council can require this, therefore an
informative to encourage this standard of design has been included
4.3.17 Finally, in this section of the report, consideration is given to the proposed
landscaping scheme for the site. Firstly, the private amenity areas for each property
are proposed to be mainly grassed, although in many gardens it is proposed to also
plant fruit trees, a traditional Garden City approach. Front gardens will mainly be
grass with shrub/hedge borders helping to frame the buildings and provide differing
themes throughout the development. Structure tree planting will take place to a
greater or lesser extent along each of the roads within the site. The majority of these
trees will be Field Maple, a native tree which will provide interest and definition along
these routes. Additional planting of native species is proposed in the buffer strip
along the Blackhorse Road frontage which will help to provide a visual and noise
screen. The two areas of open space within the site are proposed to be mainly
grassed with some tree and shrub planting.
4.3.18 With regard to hard landscaping it is proposed that the majority of the road surface
will be rolled black tarmac. This is with the exception of the roads around the areas of
open space and the broadly east-west route through the middle of the site which
would be block paved to give definition and to re-enforce the hierarchy of streets.
These are common materials which are unobjectionable in my view. Boundaries
would be treated with either close boarded timber fencing or, in various locations
within the site, brick walls.
4.3.19 Having regard to all of the comments made in this section, it is my view that
the proposed landscaping scheme that has been submitted is acceptable and
will result in a high quality development which is visually attractive and
enhances the surrounding area. Areas of landscaping, both public and private,
are reasonably generous by modern standards and the proposed mix of trees,
shrubs and grassed areas will create a pleasant appearance as well as serving
to provide structure and re-enforcement to the layout of the development.
4.3.20 Noise and Odour
Dealing first with the issue of odour, this has been raised by officers from
Environmental Health (EH) during the course of the consideration of this application.
It was considered to be a potential issue due to the proximity of some odour
producing plant close to the boundary of the site with the industrial units in Flint Road.
These potential odour sources would be in relatively close proximity to the
mechanical ventilation intake points for the apartment buildings. The applicant has
prepared a report on this issue which has been considered by colleagues in EH. The
advice given is that there would be no material issue which would warrant an
objection in this case. The mechanical ventilation intake points can also be sited on
the opposite side of the apartment buildings where they would face away from the
boundary.
PLANNING CONTROL (11.09.14)
4.3.21 The issue of noise has proved more challenging to resolve and has been the main
constraint to development on this site in my view. The issue of the surrounding noise
environment was identified by colleagues in EH at the pre-application stage where
they raised the prospect that much of the site may in fact be unsuitable for residential
development without a range of mitigation measures.
4.3.22 The applicant submitted a noise assessment with their application which
recommended that extensive noise mitigation measures in some parts of the site
would enable them to achieve the required 'good' internal noise levels as set out by
British Standard 8233 (BS8233). Habitable rooms in some of the flats would require
secondary glazing which is kept shut, as well as the introduction of mechanical
ventilation. A number of the dwellings on the Blackhorse Road frontage would also
require above standard acoustic performance in order to achieve acceptable internal
noise levels. However, the first noise report did not take into account the impact of
various boundary treatments which had been proposed and so a second report was
undertaken. The second report, which was updated in July 2014, continued to
indicate that several plots on the site would experience noise levels in external
garden areas in excess of the upper design criteria limit of 55dB LAeq,T. The report
showed that a total of 12 plots would be affected to an unacceptable level with
predicted levels of between 55 and 60 dB A or higher.
4.3.23 Following the submission of the updated report, officers considered how this issue
might be resolved and requested that the applicant re-run the noise model again to
include the introduction of 2.5 metre high fences in some specific locations around
the site, with the aim of mitigating the surrounding noise. The updated noise maps
were submitted on 20 August 2014 and showed no significant improvement in the
noise climate for the plots concerned. Following this, the applicant again
reconsidered how the noise environment could be improved to an acceptable level.
The result of this consideration is the current scheme which shows a couple of key
changes from that which was originally considered in the initial noise surveys. The
garages to plots 86-95 along the Blackhorse Road frontage have now been brought
forward to adjoin the flank walls of the dwellings. This has, in effect, created a noise
barrier along this frontage. Further to this the applicant has proposed a short section
of 5 metre high acoustic fence along the boundary with Chilfen Joinery to the north
east. This would not form the boundary of the new residential units (plots 121-123)
which would be set inside this fence, but would form the outer boundary of the site. It
is also noted by the applicant that, in this part of the site, the noise source is a roof
mounted cyclone fan which could be easily muffled with acoustic lagging, with the
agreement of the owner. At this stage this has not been agreed, but a suitably
worded condition could allow for this to take place and remove the requirement for
the acoustic fence.
4.3.24 Following the alterations outlined above, the noise consultant has re-run the noise
modelling and this now shows that an acceptable noise climate can be achieved in
each garden area that was previously adversely affected. This includes a +5 dB
correction which has been added to the predicted noise levels in order to take
account of the existing noise climate being that of industrial uses. If the 5 dB
correction were to be discounted then we would be ignoring the fact that the
prevailing noise climate is that of industrial uses.
4.3.25 Having regard to the information provided in the applicant's noise surveys, and the
British Standards that are used in the consideration of noise by Environmental Health
officers, it is now established that acceptable internal and external levels of noise can
be achieved.
PLANNING CONTROL (11.09.14)
4.3.26 Given the importance of the noise climate on this site, it is worth considering the
government’s advice on the matter contained in both the National Planning Policy
Framework (NPPF) and the National Planning Practice Guidance (NPPG).
Paragraph 123 of the NPPF advises that decisions on planning applications should
"aim to avoid noise from giving rise to significant adverse impacts on health and
quality of life as a result of new development". The key question here is what is a
significant adverse impact? The NPPF refers this issue to the Noise Policy
Statement for England, however before considering that it is worth noting the advice
on noise in the NPPG. The NPPG advises on how to determine the noise impact and
how to recognise when noise could be a concern. This is related to the "observed
effect level" this being the point at which noise would be noticed and what the
outcome of that noise may be on the quality of life of an occupant. The Noise Policy
Statement for England refers to three potential levels of effect from noise, these are:
1. NOEL - No Observed Effect Level (no effect can be detected)
2. LOAEL - Lowest Observed Adverse Effect Level (the level above which
adverse effects on health and quality of life can be detected)
3. SOAEL - Significant Observed Adverse Effect Level (the level above which
significant adverse effects on health and quality of life occur)
4.3.27 The NPPG takes on this concept and provides a table which outlines the kind of
conditions in which each of the effect levels might be considered to take place. The
NOEL is stated to be at the point where "noise can be heard, but does not cause any
change in behaviour or attitude. Can slightly affect the acoustic character of the area
but not such that there is a perceived change in the quality of life" i.e. noise is
noticeable and not intrusive. The LOAEL is considered to exist when "noise can be
heard and causes small changes in behaviour such as speaking more loudly, having
to close windows for some of the time because of noise, potential for some reported
sleep disturbance. Affects the acoustic character in the area such that there is a
perceived change in the quality of life" i.e. noise is noticeable and intrusive, and at
this point we should seek to mitigate and reduce to a minimum. The SOAEL is
considered to exist when "the noise causes a material change in behaviour and/or
attitude e.g. avoiding certain activities during periods of intrusion, where there is no
alternative ventilation, having to keep windows closed for most of the time, potential
for sleep disturbance resulting in difficulty getting to sleep, premature awakening and
difficulty getting back to sleep, quality of life diminished due to change in acoustic
character of the area.
4.3.28 Having outlined all of this we must consider where the application site sits in this
range. It is noted that some of the properties would require upgraded glazing that
they would need to keep closed, as well as mechanical ventilation, but that this would
create an acceptable internal acoustic environment. It should be noted that it is
proposed to insert a clause into the freehold of certain properties to inform them of
the reason why they have mechanical ventilation and upgraded glazing and that they
should consider keeping windows closed. The advice from colleagues in EH is that
the acoustic environment in the external areas would now also be acceptable.
Having regard to all of this, I conclude that the noise environment would be above the
LOAEL, but with the help of the mitigation measures proposed, would be below the
SOAEL. With reference to the NPPG, this means that, in parts of the site, noise
would be noticeable and intrusive, but that with the mitigation measures identified it
can be reduced to a minimum, and an acceptable level.
4.3.29 Having regard to the discussion above, I can conclude that, with the use of
suitably worded conditions, the noise and odour environment on site can
achieve an acceptable level and that therefore there are no material planning
objections to be raised against the proposal on these issues.
PLANNING CONTROL (11.09.14)
4.3.30 Parking, Traffic and Transport
In this section I will first deal with the issue of car parking. There would be a total of
283 car parking spaces to serve this development. Each of the houses would have at
least 2 off road car parking spaces, including their garages, which have been
designed to be larger at 7m x 3m, to accommodate modern vehicles. Some houses
would be able to accommodate more than two vehicles each due to the length of the
driveways. The 36 apartments would be provided with one space each. There would
also be a number of visitor parking spaces located around the site, with the majority
near to the Blackhorse Road frontage. Cycle provision is catered for within the
curtilage of each of the dwellings, and internally within the apartment buildings.
Overall, car parking provision is below that which is required by the SPD, whilst this is
not an ideal situation, there would be capacity for some vehicles to park on the street
and, in my view, a refusal on this basis would not be sustainable.
4.3.31 Many of the local residents and businesses have raised traffic and transport capacity
as an issue of concern. Issues such as the volume of additional vehicles generated
by the development, construction vehicles and existing congestion problems on
Blackhorse Road have all been raised as issues of concern for local residents. One
local business has also raised the issue of HGVs needing to access Blackhorse
Road safely.
4.3.32 As is always the case with highways impacts, the council must consider the expert
advice of the Highway Engineers from Hertfordshire Highways. They have provided
lengthy written comments on this application, covering all of the issues raised by
residents as well as some others. The headline outcome of this is that no objection is
raised, however it is worth considering some of the issues raised in more detail.
Firstly, with regard to traffic generation, data has been derived from the national
TRICS (Trip Rate Information Computer System). This system suggests that the
proposed level of development would actually generate less peak traffic than the
original permitted use of the site. Herts Highways have concluded that the level of
traffic likely to be generated would not harm the functioning of the surrounding local
highway network. Turning to safety, this has been considered specifically in the
context of the proposed access points, both to, and within the site. It has been
demonstrated that adequate visibility splays can be provided in both cases and as
such safety issues are not anticipated.
4.3.33 Several local residents have raised the issue of the existing weight restriction on
Green Lane and how this relates to construction traffic, should planning permission
be granted. Many of the issues that residents have with regard to Green Lane relate
to existing issues of enforcement. Whilst I am sympathetic to these issues, they are a
separate matter to the consideration of this planning application. However, I have
already drawn the weight restriction to the attention of the applicant and a condition is
recommended requiring the submission and agreement of a construction
management plan (CMP). In my view, the enforcement of the CMP by the developer
should be sufficient to ensure that the construction period does not exacerbate any
existing problems on Green Lane.
4.3.34 With regard to the accessibility of the development to public transport it is noted that
there are bus stops close to the site, to the west of the junction of Blackhorse Road,
which are served every 30 minutes by buses between Stotfold and Letchworth
Garden City. The train station, with services to London and Cambridge, is 2.2km to
the west of the site. Hertfordshire County Council has requested a planning
obligations contribution towards the upgrade of the existing bus stop on Blackhorse
Road to meet the relevant DDA standards, including a shelter and easy access
kerbs. This has been agreed by the applicant.
PLANNING CONTROL (11.09.14)
4.3.35 A highways issue that has presented some challenge to resolve in this application is
that of the access to the site by the council's waste collection vehicle. The highway
authority have yet to be satisfied that the internal road layout can be designed to an
adoptable standard, based on its ability to accommodate a waste collection vehicle of
12.8 metres in length. However, they are satisfied that the vehicle will be able to enter
and leave the site safely having regard to one of their recommended conditions
regarding access dimensions from the main highway network. Should the road not be
adopted by the county council as highway authority, then it would remain a private
road, maintained at residents’ expense. I have also discussed this issue with the
council's waste service manager who has advised me that we should be using a
template vehicle of 11.8 metres in length when designing these schemes. This is at
odds with the view of the highway authority, but does suggest that the road can
accommodate the vehicles in use.
4.3.36 To conclude, I am satisfied that, based on the advice of the Highway Authority,
there is no objection to be raised in terms of the impact on the proposed
development on the safe operation of the surrounding highway network, or in
terms of the accessibility of the site to forms of public transport.
4.3.37 Impacts on Existing and New Residents
A number of existing residents in the neighbouring roads of Green Lane and
Kristiansand Way have raised issues of noise, overlooking, loss of daylight/sunlight,
anti-social behaviour and other issues with regard to the proposed development. I
have considered each representation received very carefully against the scheme as
it is proposed. Dealing first with properties in Green Lane, I do have some sympathy
for the occupiers of these properties on the basis that the existing area of grassland
and self set trees at the end of their gardens would be largely removed as a result of
the proposed development. This would cause a change in the outlook from the rear of
those properties, particularly given the apparent change in levels between the
gardens of some of those properties and the application site. However, what is
proposed is the erection of a 1.8 metre high close boarded fence which would define
the boundary between the properties in Green Lane and the rear gardens of some of
the new properties in the site. The rear gardens of the properties in this part of the site
would generally be at least 15 metres in depth. Having regard to these distances, the
proposed boundary treatments and the proposed dwelling types being two storey
houses, I cannot see that a sustainable objection can be raised on the basis of
dominance or overlooking of the existing properties in Green Lane or that there would
be any other unacceptable impact on the living conditions of the occupiers of these
properties.
4.3.38 Some of the residents of Kristiansand Way have raised concerns about dominance,
overlooking, loss of sunlight/daylight and the proposed pedestrian and cycle access
which would connect the site to that road. As with the relationship with properties in
Green Lane, there would be, by modern standards, generous back to back distances
as well as fences and retained boundary vegetation. Whilst some of the dwellings
which would face towards Kristiansand Way would have rooms in the roof space, I
consider a loss of privacy by way of overlooking to be unlikely for the reasons already
outlined above with a similar conclusion being drawn on the issues of dominance and
a loss of daylight and sunlight. With regard to the proposed pedestrian and cycle
access route through to the north west which would adjoin Kristiansand Way, I have
noted that an objection has been raised to this on the basis that it would not be safe.
The proposed route would adjoin the end of a cul-de-sac within Kristiansand Way,
although it is noted that cars do pass by in one corner of the cul-de-sac in order to
reach a garage court. No adverse comments have been made by the Highway
Authority with regard to this proposed route. In my view, this element of the scheme
would be a positive feature in that it would improve pedestrian and cycle routes in the
locality as well as permeability between the two developments, encouraging walking
and cycling as a result.
PLANNING CONTROL (11.09.14)
4.3.39 Turning to consideration of relationships between proposed dwellings within the
scheme, I am satisfied that the development would provide for an acceptable
standard of living conditions for the occupiers. Most back to back distances between
properties are around 30 metres which, as noted earlier, is generous by modern
standards and means that overlooking is unlikely to result. In some locations flank
walls of dwellings do form the boundary to garden areas of other properties. I have
checked each of these relationships and can confirm that nothing more than small
first floor bathroom windows would provide any views towards neighbouring
properties. I would expect that these windows would be obscure glazed in any event,
given that they would serve bathrooms, and as such I am not concerned that there
would be any significant overlooking within the scheme itself. Having regard to the
paragraphs above, I am of the view that there would be no material harm to the
living conditions of existing neighbouring residents, or potential new
residents on the site, such that would warrant a refusal of planning
permission.
4.3.40 Other Considerations
The first topic to be considered under this heading is that of health impacts.
Following changes to the organisation of the NHS earlier in this parliament, both NHS
England and the local Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) are taking more of an
active interest in responding to specific planning applications rather than simply
feeding into the strategic planning process. As such, responses have been received
providing information on capacity constraints within the town's existing GP practices.
A planning obligations contribution has been requested towards planned growth in
the capacity of existing surgeries and this has been agreed, in principle, by the
applicant. Alongside this, the NPPF requires that planning applications and decisions
help to promote healthy communities. This can be done in several ways but includes
providing safe and accessible environments, clear pedestrian routes, high quality
public space and encouraging physical activity. This planning application helps to
meet these requirements through the provision of open spaces within the site, a
pedestrian and cycle route through to the neighbouring development at Kristiansand
Way, close proximity to the Garden City Green Way and planning obligations
contributions towards facilities at Temple Gardens, Avenue Park and Norton
Common. Having regard to these considerations I am satisfied that the health
impacts of this scheme have been adequately considered.
4.3.41 Archaeology is of some significance in this location. It is noted that some parts of
this site have been examined previously and identified evidence of Roman
occupation, remains of Neolithic occupation and a small Saxon period cemetery. It is
also noted that an early Iron Age enclosure was partially excavated in 1988 during
the construction of Kristiansand Way. Having regard to this, it is anticipated that there
will be remains of archaeological significance below the site and a range of
conditions is therefore recommended.
4.3.42 Biodiversity and nature conservation has also been considered by the applicant
and a preliminary ecological appraisal has been undertaken. The appraisal has been
considered by Hertfordshire Ecology (part of Hertfordshire County Council) who have
advised that the methodology, evaluation and analysis that has been carried out is
appropriate. The development is not anticipated to have any impact on any statutory
or non-statutory site of conservation importance. This is currently considered to be an
unfavourable habitat for bats, mammals, invertebrates or amphibians. Further survey
work and mitigation is proposed in the report and this can be controlled by condition
on the basis that no European Protected Species (EPS) are involved. It is noted that
the applicant has proposed bird boxes as well as a range of native trees and this is
considered to be positive.
PLANNING CONTROL (11.09.14)
4.3.43 Anglian Water has commented on the application with regard to wastewater
treatment and sewerage capacity. It is noted that the foul drainage from this
development is within the Letchworth Water Recycling Centre and that there is
available capacity for the likely flows from this development. It is also noted that at
present the sewerage system has available capacity. A condition is recommended in
connection with the surface water strategy.
4.3.44 Planning Obligations and Affordable Housing
Taking first the issue of affordable housing, members will note that the level of
provision proposed for this site is 40% of the scheme. Officers have advised the
applicant that the Council's existing policies can only justify the provision of 25%
affordable housing, however the applicant has decided to maintain the 40%
provision. Having regard to this, Council officers have sought that the 25%, that can
be justified, is of a mix of tenure and house types which suits the needs that have
been identified by the Council. The applicant has agreed to this mix, in full, and I
consider this to be a very positive aspect of this scheme. The remaining 15% is
provided to a mix of the applicant's discretion
4.3.45 Having regard to affordable housing, a heads of terms to a Section 106 agreement
has been agreed on the following basis:
Affordable Housing
12 x 1 bed Apartments (Rented)
24 x 2 bed Apartments (Shared Ownership)
10 x 2 bed Houses (Rented)
7 x 3 bed Houses (3 x Rented, 4 x Shared Ownership)
10 x 4 bed Houses (1 x Rented and 9 x Shared Ownership)
North Hertfordshire District Council Services
Community Centre Provision - £8,500
Informal Open Space and Play Space - £97,000
Waste and Recycling Provision - £9,546
Hertfordshire County Council Services
Sustainable Transport - £49,500
Primary Education - £418,680
Nursery Education - £66,240
Childcare - £24,364
Youth - £8,574
Library Services - £28,246
Other Services
Health - £98,823
4.3.46 All of the contributions detailed above will be index linked and can be justified by the
relevant service providers with evidence. Alongside this, the S106 agreement also
makes provision for fire hydrants, homeworking IT infrastructure and the delivery of
the affordable housing. At the time of writing the S106 agreement is in draft form with
the heads of terms above agreed. Members will be updated at the committee
meeting on the latest position on the S106 at that time.
PLANNING CONTROL (11.09.14)
4.4
Conclusion
4.4.1 Having considered all of the matters detailed above, it is my view that there are no
material planning objections to be raised against the proposal. The proposal would
achieve a high standard of layout and design, would not cause any material harm to
the living conditions of neighbouring occupiers, is acceptable in highway safety terms
and all other respects outlined above. As such I recommend that planning permission
be granted subject to the conditions set out below.
5.0
Legal Implications
5.1
In making decisions on applications submitted under the Town and Country Planning
legislation, the Council is required to have regard to the provisions of the
development plan and to any other material considerations. The decision must be
in accordance with the plan unless the material considerations indicate otherwise.
Where the decision is to refuse or restrictive conditions are attached, the applicant
has a right of appeal against the decision.
6.0
Recommendation
6.1
That planning permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions and
subject to the satisfactory completion of a Section 106 Agreement:
1.
The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of 3
years from the date of this permission.
Reason: To comply with the provisions 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 wholly in accordance
with the details specified in the application and supporting approved documents
and plans listed above.
Reason:To ensure the development is carried out in accordance with details
which form the basis of this grant of permission.
3.
The materials to be used for the elevations of the dwellings shall be Rodruza
bricks (Kingston, Esher and Richmond) and Weber Pral M Chalk render. The
materials to be used on the roofs of the dwellings shall be Russell Heritage tiles
(Burnt Orange and Rustic Peat). Combinations of these materials shall be used
on site as detailed in the amended materials schedule, unless otherwise
agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
Reason:To ensure that the development will have an acceptable appearance
which does not detract from the appearance and character of the surrounding
area.
PLANNING CONTROL (11.09.14)
4.
Full details of a construction phasing and environmental management
programme for the development hereby permitted shall be submitted to
and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the
commencement of development (including any pre-construction,
demolition or enabling works). The construction project shall thereafter
be carried out in complete accordance with the approved phasing
programme unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning
Authority. The phasing programme shall include the following elements:
a) hours of construction operations including times of deliveries and
removal of waste, which should be restricted to between 7.00am
and 5.00pm on Mondays to Fridays, 8.00am and 1.00pm on
Saturdays and at no time on Sundays or bank holidays, unless
otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority;
b) measures to minimise dust, noise, machinery and traffic noise
impacts during construction;
c) site set up and general arrangements for storing plant including
cranes, materials, machinery and equipment, temporary offices
and other facilities, construction vehicle parking and
loading/unloading and vehicle turning areas;
d) the location of construction traffic routes to and from the site,
details of their signing, monitoring and enforcement measures;
e) screening and hoarding details, to protect neighbouring
residents;
f) end of day tidying procedures to ensure protection of the site
outside the hours of construction. The construction activities
shall be designed and undertaken in accordance with the code of
best practice set out in British Standard 5228 1997 and with the
agreed details unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local
Planning Authority;
g) wheel washing facilities for construction vehicles leaving the site
and cleaning of site entrances and the adjacent public highway;
h) off site highway works in order to provide temporary access
throughout the construction period, including cable trenches
within the public highway that affect traffic movement of existing
residents work shall be completed prior to the commencement of
development, and reinstated as required;
i) foundation works that affect traffic movement of existing
residents.
Reason: To ensure the correct phasing of development in the interests of
minimising disruption to the public highway during construction,
minimising any environmental impacts, in the interests of highway safety
and amenity.
5.
Development shall not begin until a detailed surface water drainage
scheme for the site, based on the agreed Flood Risk Assessment (FRA)
reference AMA373 Rev 0 4 April 2014 and addendum has been submitted
to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The scheme
shall subsequently be implemented in accordance with the approved
details before the development is completed. The scheme shall include a
restriction in run-off and surface water storage on site as outlined in the
FRA and addendum.
Reason: To prevent the increased risk of flooding, and to improve and
protect water quality habitat and amenity.
PLANNING CONTROL (11.09.14)
6.
No development approved by this planning permission shall take place
until a remediation strategy that includes the following components to
deal with the risks associated with contamination of the site shall each
be submitted to and approved, in writing, by the Local Planning
Authority:
1. The results of a site investigation based on the submitted
Hydrock, Ground Investigation Report, January 2014 and a
detailed risk assessment, including a revised Conceptual Site
Model.
2. Based on the risk assessment in (1) an options appraisal and
remediation strategy giving full details of the remediation
measures required and how they are to be undertaken. The
strategy shall include a plan providing details of how the
remediation works shall be judged to be complete and
arrangements for contingency actions. The plan shall also detail a
long term monitoring and maintenance plan as necessary.
3. No occupation of any part of the permitted development shall take
place until a verification report demonstrating completion of
works set out in the remediation strategy in (2) shall be submitted
to and approved, in writing, by the Local Planning Authority. The
long term monitoring and maintenance plan in (2) shall be updated
and be implemented as approved.
Reason: To protect human health, the built and natural environment and
to protect groundwater. The site lies in a vulnerable groundwater area in
a source protection zone 2 and the previous use of the site as a factory
may have led to contamination.
7.
If, during development, contamination not previously identified is found to be
present at the site then no further development (unless otherwise agreed in
writing with the local planning authority) shall be carried out until the developer
has submitted a remediation strategy to the local planning authority detailing
how this unsuspected contamination shall be dealt with and obtained written
approval from the local planning authority. The remediation strategy shall be
implemented as approved.
Reason: Intrusive investigations will not necessarily capture all contaminants
present, hence the need to appropriately address any new source discovered
during excavation and development.
8.
Development shall not begin until a scheme for surface water disposal
has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning
authority. Infiltration systems shall only be used where it can be
demonstrated that they will not pose a risk to groundwater quality. The
development shall be carried out in accordance with the approval details.
Reason: To protect groundwater. Soakaways and infiltration features
through contaminated soils are unacceptable as they create new
pathways for pollutants to migrate into groundwater, mobilising
contaminants already in the subsurface and causing further pollution.
PLANNING CONTROL (11.09.14)
9.
The development shall proceed in accordance with the recommendations
detailed in Chapter 5 of the Preliminary Ecological Appraisal carried out by
ELMAW Consulting dated 28 October 2013, unless otherwise agreed in writing
by the Local Planning Authority.
Reason: To establish whether any non European Protected Species are
present on the site and, if so, to ensure their satisfactory removal and
relocation.
10.
A) No demolition/development shall take place/commence until a Written
Scheme of Investigation has been submitted to and approved by the
local planning authority in writing. The scheme shall include an
assessment of significance and research questions; and:
1. The programme and methodology of site investigation and
recording
2. The programme for post investigation assessment
3. Provision to be made for analysis of the site, investigation and
recording
4. Provision to be made for publication and dissemination of the
analysis and records of the site investigation
5. Provision to be made for archive deposition of the analysis and
records of the site investigation
6. Nomination of a competent person or persons/organisation to
undertake the works set out within the Written Scheme of
Investigation.
Reason: The site lies within an area where there is significant potential
for archaeological remains and any finds should be retrieved and/or
recorded before they are damaged or destroyed as a result of the
development hereby permitted.
11.
B) The demolition/development shall take place/commence in accordance with
the programme of archaeological works set out in the Written Scheme of
Investigation approved under condition (A)
Reason:The site lies within an area where there is significant potential for
archaeological remains and any finds should be retrieved and/or recorded
before they are damaged or destroyed as a result of the development hereby
permitted.
12.
C) The development shall not be occupied/used until the site investigation and
post investigation assessment has been completed in accordance with the
programme set out in the Written Scheme of Investigation approved under
condition (A) and the provision made for analysis and publication where
appropriate
Reason:The site lies within an area where there is significant potential for
archaeological remains and any finds should be retrieved and/or recorded
before they are damaged or destroyed as a result of the development hereby
permitted.
13.
The development hereby permitted shall not commence until the
proposed access has been constructed to base course construction for
the first 10 metres, the existing accesses have been closed and the
existing footway/verge has been reinstated to the current specification of
Hertfordshire County Council and to the local Planning Authority's
satisfaction.
Reason: In order to protect highway safety and the amenity of other
users of the public highway.
PLANNING CONTROL (11.09.14)
14.
Before the driveways to the proposed dwellings are first brought into use 0.65
metre x 0.65metre pedestrian visibility splays shall be provided and
permanently maintained to the each side. They shall be measured from the
point where the edges of the access way cross the highway boundary, 0.65
metres into the site and 0.65 metres along the highway boundary. Therefore
forming a triangular visibility splay. Within which, there shall be no obstruction
to visibility between 600 mm and 2.0 metres above the carriageway level.
Reason: To provide adequate visibility for drivers entering and leaving the site.
15.
The gradient of the main accesses from Blackhorse Road shall not be steeper
than 1 in 20 for the first 10 metres from the edge of the carriageway.
Reason: To ensure a vehicle is approximately level before being driven off and
on to the highway.
16.
The access road shall be 5.5 metres wide for the first 10 metres thereafter the
principal access road shall be 5.0 metres wide with localised widening of
500mm around any sharp bends, the kerb radii shall be 8.0 metres at site
entrances, which shall be complete with tactile crossing feature..
Reason: To facilitate the free and safe flow of other traffic on the highway and
the safety and convenience of pedestrians and people with a disability.
17.
Construction of the approved development shall not commence until a
Construction Traffic Management Plan has been submitted to and
approved in writing by the local planning authority in consultation with
the highway authority. Thereafter the construction of the development
shall only be carried out in accordance with the approved Plan. The
Construction Traffic Management Plan shall include construction vehicle
numbers/routing of construction traffic and shall be carried out as
approved.
Reason: In order to protect highway safety and the amenity of other
users of the public highway.
18.
Prior to the commencement of the highway works as identified on the ‘in
principle’ site plan number 13/035/003-B; a site layout shall be submitted to the
local planning authority with details showing the forward visibility around the
bends, sightline visibility splays from the junctions of the site layout and a swept
path analysis to demonstrate that a refuse collection vehicle in current use can
be accommodated safely within the carriageway the details shall be in
accordance with Manual for Streets with the ultimate design being technically
approved prior to commencement on site.
Reason: To ensure that the development does not adversely affect the safety
and operation of the highway network in accordance with National Planning
Policy Framework promoting sustainable transport section 4 par 35 and Manual
for Streets.
19.
Within 12 months of occupation of the 50th dwelling the applicant shall submit a
revised final “Residential Travel plan” with the object of reducing residents and
visitors travelling to the development by private car which shall be implemented
after its approval in writing by the local planning authority.
PLANNING CONTROL (11.09.14)
Reason: To encourage the use of sustainable transport modes, as well as
promoting the available alternatives to the car
20.
Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General
Permitted Development) Order 1995 as amended no development as set out in
Classes A-F of Part 1 of Schedule 2 to the Order or Part 2 to the Order, (or any
subsequent Statutory Instrument which revokes, amends and/or replaces
those provisions) shall be carried out without first obtaining a specific planning
permission from the Local Planning Authority.
Reason: Given the nature of this development and in order to maintain the high
quality layout and design, the Local Planning Authority considers that
development which would normally be "permitted development" should be
retained within planning control in the interests of the character and amenities
of the area.
21.
A detailed lighting scheme shall be undertaken and submitted to the Local
Planning Authority for approval prior to the occupation of any dwellings. The
scheme shall include details of all external lighting and there shall be no
external illumination erected, installed or operated on any part of the site other
than in accordance with these approved details, unless otherwise agreed in
writing by the Local Planning Authority. The following limits shall not be
exceeded by the exterior light installations:
Sky Glow ULR (Max%)
5.0
Max light into windows Ev (lux)
07.00- 23.00hrs 10 23.00- 07.00hrs 2
Source Intensity l(kcd)
07.00- 23.00hrs 10 23.00- 07.00hs 1
Building Luminance
07.00- 23.00hrs
Average, L (cd/m²) 10
Reason: To safeguard the amenity of future residents.
22.
The noise mitigation measures detailed in the Cass Allen Associates Ltd report
reference RP01-13328 Rev 3 dated 31 July 2014 (Noise Impact
Assessment) and the subsequent addendum report reference LR01-13115
dated 22nd August 2014 (relating to acoustics barriers, glazing and
mechanical ventilation specifications) shall be approved by the LPA and no
changes shall be permitted unless otherwise agreed in writing by the LPA. The
development shall not be occupied until the approved scheme is fully
implemented in accordance with the details provided. Once implemented, the
scheme of measures shall be maintained in accordance with the details in
perpetuity.
Reason: to protect the residential amenities of future occupiers of the
development.
23.
All approved hard and soft landscaping shall be completed in
accordance with the approved details or particulars prior to the first
occupation of the development, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the
Local Planning Authority.
Reason:To ensure the correct phasing of development in the interests of
good planning and amenity.
Informative
Prior to the commencement of demolition of the existing buildings, a survey
should be undertaken in order to identify the presence of asbestos containing
materials. Any asbestos containing materials should be handled and disposed
of appropriately. Where necessary this should include the use of licensed
PLANNING CONTROL (11.09.14)
contractors and waste disposal sites licensed to receive asbestos. This is in
order to protect the residential amenity of existing and future residents
Informative
Works to be undertaken on the adjoining highway shall be constructed to the
satisfaction of the Highway Authority and in accordance with Hertfordshire
County Council publication Roads in Hertfordshire Highway Design Guide.
Before proceeding with the proposed development, the applicant shall contact
hertsdirect@hertscc.gov.uk or for information use the HCC website
www.hertsdirect.org. or call on 0300 1234 047 to obtain the requirements for a
section 278 agreement for the associated road works as part of the
development. This should be carried out prior to any development work is
carried out. This is in order to ensure that work undertaken on the highway is
constructed to the current Highway Authority's specification, to an appropriate
standard and by a contractor who is authorised to work in the Public Highway.
Informative
Hertfordshire Police Architectural Liaison Officer advises that the development
is constructed to achieve Secured By Design (SBD) accreditation.
Proactive Statement
Planning permission has been granted for this proposal. The Council acted
proactively through positive engagement with the applicant at the
pre-application stage and during the determination process which led to
improvements to the scheme. The Council has therefore acted proactively in
line with the requirements of the Framework (paragraphs 186 and 187) and in
accordance with the Town and Country Planning (Development Management
Procedure) (England) (Amendment No. 2) Order 2012.
PLANNING CONTROL (11.09.14)