application no: date of application: 21 march … · date of application: 21 march 2014 statutory...

Date of Meeting: 16th October 2014 APPLICATION NO: 14/0430/FUL DATE OF APPLICATION: 21 March 2014 STATUTORY START DATE: 7 April 2014 SITE LOCATION Land South of Merry Hill Road and St Margaret’s School, Merry Hill Road, Bushey, Hertfordshire. DEVELOPMENT Development works to create 26 residential units through the conversion of existing locally listed buildings, grade II listed barn & erection of new build houses & flats. Demolition of locally listed former stables building, outbuildings & the preparatory classroom building, removal of the staff car parking area & the tennis court. Alterations to the existing vehicular & pedestrian access onto Merry Hill Road. Associated landscaping, trees & communal open space alterations. Development works will facilitate the modernisation & upgrading of existing facilities to the existing school. (Amended plans received 22/07/2014) AGENT APPLICANT Mr Marcus Lambert Kinetic Centre Theobald Street Elstree Herts WD6 4PJ

C/O Agent

WARD: Bushey Park

GREEN BELT: Yes

CONSERVATION AREA: No LISTED BUILDING : Grade II Listed Barn

TREE PRES. ORDER: No 1.0 Summary of Recommendation 1.1 Grant Planning Permission subject to conditions and completion of a S106 legal

agreement. 1.2 Should the Section 106 legal agreement not be completed by 14th November 2014 it

is recommended that the Managers of Planning and Building Control be given delegated powers, if considered appropriate, to refuse the planning application for the reason set out below: Suitable provision for public open space, public leisure facilities, playing fields, greenways, cemeteries, museum and cultural facilities and section 106 monitoring has not been secured. Further, monies towards primary education, secondary education, childcare, youth facilities, libraries and sustainable transport have also not been secured. The application therefore fails to adequately address the environmental works, infrastructure and community facility requirements arising as a consequence of the proposed form of development contrary to the requirements of policies R2, L5 and M2 of the Hertsmere Local Plan adopted 2003, Policy CS21 of the Core Strategy (2013), together with the Planning Obligations SPD Part A and Part B (2010) and the NPPF (2012).

2.0 Application site / Surrounding area 2.1 The application site is located on Merry Hill Road at the southern edge of Bushey.

The site is located on the edge of in designated Green Belt land. To the north, east and west of the site, development is predominantly residential. To the south of the site is undeveloped Green Belt land. The site has three separate vehicular accesses off Merry Hill Road.

2.2 The site comprises a number of buildings which form part of St. Margaret’s School.

There are four locally listed buildings on the site, known as Hillbrow, Merry Hill House, Merry Hill Farmhouse and the Stables. There is a grade II listed barn at the northern end of the site which fronts onto Merry Hill Road. The site is relatively open, with the southern end of the site comprising a large open area with mature trees and vegetation.

3.0 Proposal 3.1 The application seeks permission for 26 private residential units which comprise 3 x 1

bedroom flats, 8 x 2 bedroom flats, 7 x 3 bedroom houses, 7 x 5 bedroom houses, 1 x 6 bedroom house. These units are to be developed through the conversion of existing locally listed buildings, a grade II listed barn and the erection of new build houses and flats. The development involves the demolition of the locally listed former stables building, preparatory classroom building and outbuildings, the removal of the staff car parking area and the tennis court. The application also involves alterations to the existing vehicular and pedestrian access onto Merry Hill Road and associated landscaping, trees and communal open space alterations.

3.2 The application has been brought to committee because it is a major application (net

increase of 10 or more units). 3.3 Key Characteristics

Site Area 27125m2 approx.

Mix Educational and residential

Dimensions See plans

Numbers of Car Parking Spaces Proposed: 68 car parking spaces

4.0 Relevant planning history: No relevant planning history 5.0 Notifications 5.1 In Support Against Comments Neighbours

Notified Contributors

Received

0 10 2 108 12

5.2 Representations have been made by 12 neighbours and third party organisations.

Following re-consultation two of the neighbours each submitted a further letter of objection. The objections and comments raised are summarised below.

5.3 Green Belt

• Impact on openness of the Green Belt contrary to national and local planning policy

• Enabling development is not listed in the NPPF as a valid reason for inappropriate Green Belt development

• A strong enough case has not been submitted to constitute very special

circumstances for development in the Green Belt

• Impact of high density development on the Green Belt

• Overdevelopment of the Green Belt 5.4 Affordable housing/Viability

• No affordable housing is provided

• The Viability Assessment, including the costs of the school refurbishment and the residual land value of the site, is not available for public viewing

5.5 Design

• Height of proposed dwellings

• Increase in hard surface

• Impact on the street scene

• Impact of the development on the character of the surrounding area 5.6 Highway

• Increase in traffic movements and congestion

• Existing conditions of Merry Hill Road

• Impact of construction traffic on the road network and to highway safety

• Impact on highway safety

• 13/2504/OUT was refused on highway safety grounds

• Loss of car parking on southern site

• No provision for pedestrians

• The pavement extension only benefits the new development

• Pollution

• Increase in on-street parking 5.7 Amenity

• Noise

• Loss of privacy and overlooking to Littlecote 5.8 Heritage

• Demolition of locally listed stables building

• Conversion of the grade II listed barn

• Design approach to the listed barn conversion and extensions 5.9 Environment

• Loss of trees and vegetation as a result of the new path

• Drainage and flooding

• Visual impact on the Woodland Trust area

• Retention of trees as a benefit of the development is not a justification 5.10 Other

• Existing and proposed footprints have not been provided

• Potential future development in the Green Belt could result to fund the schools second and third phases of their masterplan

• Extra burden on local services and infrastructure

• Many development sites in Merry Hill remain unfinished

• There are no benefits to the wider community – St. Margaret’s School is private

• No economic benefit for the community

• The houses will be high value

• Pressure on sewerage and utilities

5.11 Notices Site Notice (Generic) Expiry Date: 18th June 2014 Watford Observer Expiry Date: 9th May 2014

6.0 Consultations English Heritage Raise no objection.

Revised plans The amended plans address our concerns in relation to the centrally placed extension and a proposed gabled porch by removing these elements from the scheme, thereby reducing the harm to the significance of the barn. 25 September 2014 Originally submitted plans The barn has a special open quality with an uncluttered volume open to the roof. The open interior, impressive proportions and long sight lines are part of the significance of the listed building. For this reason, we would expect any subdivision to be kept to a minimum. The proposed gable ended single storey rear extension would be wider and project much further from the main range than the cross wings, almost three times as far. Give its central location this would make the new extension the visually dominant element. The gable end would be largely glazed, this would be out of character with the simple vernacular and materials of the barn. In addition to this, the proposed extension would result in the loss of the existing central dormer window, which is appropriate to listed building and part of the historic fabric. The proposed extension would cause harm to the listed building’s significance as it would be overly dominant, result in the loss of historic fabric, and erode of the barn’s agricultural character. The gabled porch on the north east elevation would appear too domestic and would cause harm to the character of the agricultural building. The proposal would cause harm to the significance of the grade II listed barn and therefore is contrary to the requirements of paragraphs 132 and 134 of the NPPF. 06 May 2014 and 03 July 2014

Highways HCC Raise no objection. The proposed access will allow vehicle movements in both directions. The proposed internal road network is consistent with development policies to minimise the dominance of

parking areas. The proposed visibility meets the requirements of the Manual for Streets design guidance. The internal road network is sufficient to accommodate refuse and emergency vehicles. Measures for managing the construction traffic generated by the proposed development are considered appropriate. The development intends to provide a number of off-site highway improvements. The proposed footpath will improve pedestrian facilities on the southern side of Merry Hill Road and improve connectivity to the east. It also proposes to improve vehicular access to the school, relocate the zebra crossing and widen part of Merry Hill Road. For a net gain of 26 dwellings, HCC seek a financial contribution of £19,500 for sustainable transport. Recommend inclusion of a condition requiring the submission of a Construction Traffic Management Plan. 19 June 2014

Crime Prevention Design Advisor (Police)

Raise no objection. 16 April 2014 and 13 June 2014

Thames Water Development Planning

Raise no objection. Recommend inclusion of conditions requiring a piling method statement to be submitted. 23 April 2014 and 13 June 2014

Drainage Services Raise no objection. Recommend inclusion of conditions requiring the submission of a scheme for the on-site storage and regulated discharge of surface water run-off and a drainage impact study. 14 April 2014 and 07 July 2014

Natural England Consultation Service

Raise no objection. 14 April 2014 and 30 June 2014

Hertfordshire Ecology

Raise no objection. Recommend the inclusion of informatives relating to bats, birds and great crested newts. 28 April 2014

National Grid Company Plc

Raise no objection. 15 April 2014

Housing Raise no objection. Hertsmere’s policies require 9 units to be affordable housing. SPD ratio split is 75% rented units to be social rented to the Council’s Tenancy Strategy policy requirement and 25% for intermediate housing. The planning statement suggests that the enabling of St

Margaret’s School has made the scheme unviable to provide the affordable housing provision. Housing believes any changes to the affordable housing provision will be based on the final stages of negotiations agreed by the Council with regards to Greenbelt land policy. This means that a cascade policy will be implemented in the s.106 agreement in order that the Council can review the provision of Affordable housing requirement development progresses. 13 June 2014

HCC Developer Services

Raise no objection. Based on the amended information for the development of 26 residential units (7x 3 bedroom open market house, 8x 5+ bedroom open market houses, 4x 1 bedroom open market flats and 7x 2bedroom open market flats) we would seek the following financial contributions and fire hydrant provision: Primary Education - £60,903 Secondary Education - £66,519 Youth - £1,293 Libraries - £4,717 Fire hydrant provision is also sought and should be secured by the standard form of words in a planning obligation. 13 June 2014

Conservation Officer

Raise no objection. Revised plans The original approach to the conversion of the Listed Barn has been substantially improved. The proposals no longer include the demolition and ‘reconstruction’ of the barn. The barn will be retained in-situ and remain largely unaltered in terms of its character and appearance. The design approach to the barn and its conversion has also been substantially improved. The road elevation of the barn will remain largely unaltered apart from repair work. The proposed new enabling structure will employ a traditional palette of materials and is of a simple, uncompetitive, reasonable design. Based on the provisional design details submitted the revised proposals will ensure that the listed barn is retained in a sustainable use. The proposed new design will also retain its overall historic and architectural interest. I can therefore recommend the new approach to securing the future of the Listed Barn for support. Work has been undertaken to reduce the impact of the neighbouring new development on the setting of the Listed Building. However, due to the emphasis placed on resolving the

critical issues to the approach to the Listed Barn specifically the approach to resolving setting issues has not been fully resolved. Two key elements should be further considered:

- That the proposed landscaping scheme is developed further in order to reduce the potential impact of negative intrusive and domesticating elements on the setting of the Listed Barn.

- That the original road access to the locally listed ‘Hillbrow House’ is retained and reinstated along with the boundary hedging separating ‘Hillbrow House’ from the wider development.

Recommend inclusion of conditions relating to: landscaping, completion of works to heritage assets Other recommended conditions include: Condition CD01, Condition CD03, Condition CD 04, Condition CD05, Condition CD06, Condition CD10, Condition CD11, Condition CE01, Condition CC03, Condition CC02, Condition CB18, Condition CB19 25 July 2014 Originally submitted plans The Grade II Listed Barn 30m North of Merry Hill Farm House, Merry Hill Road, Bushey. This late C17 or early C18 timber framed barn has had a significant proportion of its original fabric replaced. However, it retains its original plan form and overall elevation treatments. Indeed the double-ended threshing plan is an unusual arrangement. The barn and farmhouse are the most significant elements of the original farm complex surviving on the site today. Their physical relationship to each other and connectivity to surviving landscape features (in particular the historic boundary /trackway) and the road form key elements to the setting of this listed building. The current proposals for the listed barn are for its dismantling and reconstruction and conversion to residential use. Dismantling of a Listed Building constitutes demolition. Listed Building Consent for the demolition of a Listed Building will therefore be required. Any potential application will have to be fully informed and justified. At present insufficient information has been provided to justify the proposals. Proposed Design for the Barn: Insufficient details have been provided to determine the impact of the proposals on the barns historic interest/ significance. However the following general comments on the design approach can be offered. The current proposals see the plan form of the barn largely

retained. However the elevational treatment is fundamentally altered. The internal arrangement of the building is also completely subsumed into a domestic layout with almost the complete loss of the original spatial and functional arrangement. The setting of the listed barn and locally listed farm house: The current proposals also have a negative impact on the setting of the listed barn and locally listed farm house. This includes:

- breaking down the physical and visual relationship and connectivity to the farm house and historic trackway and boundary (hedge-line)

- the introduction of hard/ semi-formal landscape elements and boundary treatments

- the reduction in openness and plot size to farm house and barn undermining their relationship to one another

- the encroachment of domestic architectural development and loss of historic built hierarchy (i.e. the farm house and barn are principal buildings in size/ prominence now (and historically) but will be partially subsumed by larger domestic development)

- the formalising and structural approach to access and vehicle circulation

Based on the above the current proposals should be withdrawn or refused. 18 June 2014

Environment Agency

Raise no objection. Recommend inclusion of condition relating to surface water drainage. 29 April 2014 and 16 June 2014

Sport England Raise no objection. Sport England does not wish to comment on this application. 22 April 2014

UK Power Networks

Raise no objection. The proposed development is in close proximity to St Margaret Kiosk substation. Buildings should be greater than seven metres from the substation. Buildings should be designed so that rooms of high occupancy, i.e. bedrooms and living rooms, do not overlook or have windows opening out over the substation. 17 June 2014

Environmental Health & Licensing

Raise no objection. Recommend inclusion of condition relating to contaminated land.

07 May 2014

Tree Officer Raise no objection. I have visited the site and reviewed the submitted Arboricultural Report, ref. 0214-1454 rev1, and conclude that it reflects the true quality of the trees existing on the site. The better quality trees are away from the development area, (within the wooded area at the southern end). All of the trees to be removed are low quality apart from one moderate quality weeping ash. This tree does have character however it is a small specimen with little potential to develop. None of the trees have significant amenity value within the wider landscape and it should be possible to mitigate any loss with a suitable landscaping scheme. Recommend inclusion of condition for tree protection plan and landscaping to include trees. 18 September 2014

EDF Energy Networks

No response received.

Building Control No response received.

Senior Traffic Engineer


Herts And Middlesex Wildlife Trust


Waste Management Services


Affinity Water No response received.

Asset Management - Parks & Cemeteries


Cllr Harvey Cohen No response received.

Cllr Linda Silver No response received.

Hertfordshire Fire & Rescue Service


County Development Unit/Spatial & Land Use Planning


7.0 Policy Designation • Green Belt

• Grade II Listed Building

• Locally Listed Buildings 8.0 Relevant Planning Policies National Planning Policy Framework

National Planning Practice Guidance Core Strategy – CS4 Affordable Housing Core Strategy – CS12 The Enhancement of the natural environment Core Strategy – CS13 The Green Belt

Core Strategy – CS14 Protection or enhancement of heritage assets Core Strategy – Policy CS16 Environmental impact of development Core Strategy – Policy CS17 Energy and CO2 Reductions Core Strategy – Policy CS21 Standard charges and other planning obligations Core Strategy – Policy CS22 Securing a high quality and accessible environment Core Strategy – Policy CS25 Accessibility and parking Local Plan – Policy C1 Green Belt Local Plan – Policy C4 Development Criteria in the Green Belt Local Plan – Policy H8 Residential Development Standards Local Plan – Policy D3 Control of Development Drainage and Runoff Considerations Local Plan – D20 Supplementary Guidance Local Plan – Policy D21 Design and Setting of Development Local Plan – Policy E3 Species Protection Local Plan – Policy E7 Trees and Hedgerows – Protection and Retention Local Plan – Policy E8 Trees, Hedgerows and Development Local Plan – Policy E13 Listed Buildings – Alteration and Extensions Local Plan – Policy E14 Listed Buildings – Changes of Use Local Plan – Policy E16 Listed Buildings – Development Affecting the Setting of a Listed Building Local Plan – Policy E18 Buildings of Local Interest Local Plan – Policy M2 Development and Movement Local Plan – Policy M12 Highway Standards Parking Standards SPD Planning and Design Guide SPD – Part D Guidelines for Development Interim Technical Note Waste Storage Provision Equality Act 2010 Biodiversity, Trees and Landscape SPD – Part B Biodiversity, Trees and Landscape SPD – Part C Affordable Housing SPD Planning Obligations SPD – Part A Planning Obligations SPD – Part B

9.0 Key issues • Background

• Principle of development in the Green Belt

• Affordable housing / Section 106 contributions

• Design

• Heritage

• Car parking and highway implications

• Landscaping

• Residential amenity

• Biodiversity and wildlife

• Waste and refuse

• Environmental impact

• Equality and diversity 10.0 Comments Background Associated applications 10.1 St. Margaret’s School, Bushey have drawn up a ten year master plan which is a long

term strategy to modernise and improve the educational facilities. The development works proposed in this application are to enable and directly fund the first phase of

works for the master plan. Currently the existing building stock at the school is in need of significant repair and maintenance, with some close to being unfit for purpose. Other buildings need adapting to meet the existing and future needs of the school. The first phase of works to address these issues have been divided into a number of planning applications, some of which have been determined:

10.2 Application ref. number Decision

13/2144/LBC GC 04/12/13

14/0023/LBC GC 13/03/14

14/0041/FUL GP 14/03/14

14/0042/LBC GC 13/03/14

14/0342/LBC GC 02/05/14

14/0404/FUL Yet to be determined

14/0405/LBC Yet to be determined

14/0492/FUL GP 10/06/2014

14/0560/FUL GP 11/06/2014

14/0561/LBC GC 11/06/2014

10.3 The S106 agreement will bind this application to the first phase of works to ensure

that the capital receipt from the sale of the site for residential development will fund these works directly as part of the ‘enabling development argument’. Further details of the works and the S106 are considered in the rest of the report.

Pre-application 10.4 A pre-application was submitted in August 2013 and negotiations have been on-

going until the date the application was formally submitted. A pre-application report was issued by the Council in September 2013. Nine pre-applications meetings were held, two of which were attended by councillors. A number of issues were discussed in these meetings which resulted in amendments to elements of the scheme.

10.5 Pre-application discussions raised the following key concerns from the Local

Planning Authority:

• Principle of development in the Green Belt;

• Layout, design, size, bulk and mass of the development and the impact of this on the openness of the Green Belt and heritage assets;

• Impact of the development on the listed and locally listed buildings on the site;

• Shortfall of affordable housing and planning obligations proposed;

• Highway safety implications. 10.6 Amendments to the application have been made as a result of discussions held at

the pre-application meetings. Discussions relating to viability established the Council’s position in relation to the shortfall of affordable housing provision and planning obligations as well as to justify the enabling development argument to outweigh the harm of development in the Green Belt. The key amendments which were achieved through the pre-application process were:

10.7 • Reduction of the height, bulk, and mass of the units with the alteration of the

building footprints and the introduction of one and a half storey buildings with projecting gables, dormer windows and low eaves;

• Alterations to the layout of the development to contain the development and prevent sprawl into the Green Belt;

• Introduction of three design ‘character areas’ to respect the setting of the heritage assets and the rural setting;

• Rearrangement of car parking areas to be better integrated within the site;

• Improvements to the wider highway network, to include traffic calming

methods and the extension of the existing pedestrian footpath. 10.8 The applicant and agent also held a parents and staff presentation evening, two

public exhibitions and a planning committee Members exhibition. 10.9 This planning application was submitted in March 2014. A Planning Performance

Agreement (PPA) has been signed between the Local Planning Authority and the agent. The PPA is a voluntary agreement between parties as a way forward in order for a scheme to be assessed by the Local Planning Authority in a certain timeframe.

10.10 This current planning application is the result of positive and proactive pre-application

meetings between the Local Planning Authority and the agent. Principle of development in the Green Belt Policy expectation 10.11 The application site is located in the Green Belt where there is a general presumption

against inappropriate development, as advised by the NPPF 2012. Construction of new buildings provided it falls within the purposes, as outlined under paragraph 89 of the NPPF 2012, which includes ‘the partial or complete redevelopment of previously developed sitesLwhether redundant or in continuing useLwhich would not have a greater impact on the openness of the Green Belt and the purpose of including land within it than the existing development.’ Any disproportionate increase is considered to be inappropriate development and would require very special circumstances to justify the impact on the openness of the Green Belt.

10.12 This view is reiterated in local planning policy, Policies C1 and C5 of the Hertsmere

Local Plan (2003) and policy CS13 of the Core Strategy (2013) seek to control any development in the Green Belt and to ensure that urban sprawl is prevented by keeping land permanently open. In addition, considerations to the visual impact in terms of openness are equally important in the assessment.

Redevelopment of brownfield site in the Green Belt 10.13 Given the above, there is no objection in principle to the change of use of the site to

residential use, and the redevelopment of the existing buildings. In order to establish whether the development would constitute inappropriate development in the Green Belt, changes in footprint, floor space and volume must be calculated.

10.14 It is noted that a number of redundant barns on the site were demolished in 2010.

The NPPF (2012) defines previously developed land in the Green Belt as ‘land which is or was occupied by a permanent structure.’ It is therefore considered that the previously existing footprint, floor space and volume of the demolished barns, can be included as previously developed land.

10.15 The table below provides details of the previously developed land on the site:

Previously developed land

Footprint (m2) Floorspace (m2) Volume (m3)

Demolished Barns 1,384 1,245 4,152

Grade II Listed Barn 111.4 98.8 471

Hillbrow 215.5 415.8 1,335

Merry Hill Farmhouse 95.3 159.1 695.81

Merry Hill House 404.7 819.4 3,183.14

Preparatory Classrooms 302.9 273.7 912.28

Preparatory Department 73.9 123.6 354.25

Roads 2,859.6 N/A N/A

Hard standing 1,193.3 N/A N/A

Tennis Court 301.4 N/A N/A

Total 6,942 3,135.4 11,103.48

10.16 The below provides the details of the proposed development on the site (including

those which are to be retained):

Footprint (m2) Floorspace (m2) Volume (m3)

6060.5 4080.4 16,673.88

10.17 The previously developed land on the site has a total footprint of 6,942m2. The

proposed development on the site would have a total footprint of 6,050.5 m2 which would therefore result in a 13% decrease on the previously developed footprint.

10.18 The previously developed land on the site has a total floorspace of 3,135.4m2. The

proposed development on the site would have a total floorspace of 4,080.4m2 which would therefore result in a 30% increase on the previously developed floorspace.

10.19 The previously developed land on the site has a total volume of 11,103.48 m3. The

proposed development on the site would have a total volume of 16,673.88 m3 which would therefore result in a 50% increase on the previously developed volume.

10.20 The calculations clearly demonstrate that the development results in a

disproportionate increase on the existing buildings on the site. Therefore a case of very special circumstances is required to justify the impact on the openness on the Green Belt. The applicant has presented a case of very special circumstances which are outlined and assessed below.

Enabling Development – Educational facilities 10.21 The key special circumstance to justify this inappropriate development in the Green

Belt is that the proposed development will enable necessary development to St. Margaret’s School. The NPPF attaches great importance to ensuring that a sufficient choice of school places is available and great weight should be given to the need to alter schools. The principle of selling land for development in the Green Belt to fund improved educational facilities at an existing school has been well established in planning.

10.22 This application is proposed to fund Phase 1 of St. Margaret’s School’s 10 year

masterplan. Currently, the existing building stock at the school is in need of significant repair and maintenance, with some close to being unfit for purpose. Other buildings need adapting to meet the existing and future needs of the school. The school is currently split between two sites, either side of Merry Hill Road. This split has logistical issues on a daily basis due to unnecessary pupil and staff movements crossing the road throughout the day. Merging the school onto one site will have operational advantages as well as improving the security for the school pupils. The works also seek to address the congestion and traffic issues suffered by the surrounding road network by improving the access and the internal coach and car drop off arrangements. Phase 1 of the St. Margaret’s School masterplan seeks to address the most pressing needs of the school which consist of:

10.23 Building Phase 1 Works

Lower School Building

− Demolition of pre-fab additions

− Two storey extensions

− Full refurbishment of existing areas

− New hard play area

− Refurbish existing tarmac car parking area

− New fire escape stair

− Outdoor learning

Grant Block − Division of 1 no. classrooms to create 2 teaching spaces

− Creation of teaching space on mezzanine floor

− Refurbishment of speech and drama teaching space

Geography Block − Refurbishment of classrooms

− Reconfiguration of entrance area to creation additional WC’s and locker area

− Extension to provide offices and additional changing area for yrs 7 & 8

Waterhouse Building − Refurbishment of drama suite and careers office to create teaching spaces/offices

− Refurbishment of ICT lab to become drama studio/teaching space

− Refurbishment of kitchen and dining to accommodate infants and prep, refurbishment of courtyard WC’s

− Refurbishment of exam rooms to become 6th form study/common areas, careers centre

− Addition of acoustic insulation between English classrooms

− Revisions to layout for English classrooms, storage, learning support and offices

Medical Centre − Internal partitions removed to create more efficient changing space

− New furniture (benches and lockers)

− Heating controls addressed

Technology Building − Reprogrammed to become music department

− New partitions

− Acoustic insulations/surfaces added

External works − Create new coach and car drop off area on existing tennis courts

− New car park to sports hall, resurface drive

− Refresh of 2 tennis courts

− Extend existing 2 courts to 3

− Refresh existing tennis court used for parking

− New MUGA adjacent to sports hall

− Improve existing grass pitches

− Install/upgrade access control/security systems

− New pedestrian path to sports hall (north site

− New pedestrian path to sports hall (south site)

− New pedestrian crossing

Casson Centre − Textiles absorbed within existing teaching areas and provision for better storage. Repairs to gutters/fascias

− Addition of rooflights and light touch refresh to improve daylighting and aesthetics

General landscaping − General landscaping

10.24 In order to establish why a cross subsidy is needed and why an enabling

development of this scale is necessary, a financial viability appraisal has been submitted by the applicant. This has been independently verified by BPS Chartered Surveyors and Savills acting on behalf of Hertsmere Borough Council. The independent viability assessment agrees that the proposed quantum of development,

being 26 private residential units, is necessary to raise sufficient funds to finance the proposed Phase 1 works to the school. Officers are therefore satisfied that the harm of the development in the Green Belt is outweighed by the need for the delivery of the Phase 1 works to meet the existing and future needs of St. Margaret’s School, Bushey.

Enabling development - Heritage assets 10.25 Another element of the applicant’s case of special circumstances is the need to fund

the refurbishment and ongoing maintenance of the Grade II Listed Building, known as the Waterhouse Building, on the main school site. A number of the Phase 1 works are to the Grade II Listed Waterhouse Building. This is the key building on the school site and houses the central administration, boarding, library, dining and some teaching. This building requires significant refurbishment to improve the standards of the teaching facilities and the kitchen areas. The proposed residential development provides funds, as outlined in the viability report for necessary maintenance works and refurbishment works to the Grade II Listed Building.

Highway Improvements 10.26 The application seeks to introduce a number of highway improvements to the

surrounding road network. This is not a standard requirement for new residential developments, however concerns have been raised by the school, neighbouring residents, and Ward Councillors in relation to the existing highway conditions. As a result the applicant has negotiated some off-site highway improvement works with the Highways Authority which will be funded by the residential development. These works consist of:

10.27 • Reconfigured accesses to the St. Margaret’s Sports Centre and St.

Margaret’s School. This includes alterations to the internal road network on the northern school site which will improve pick up and drop off arrangements for cars and coaches, thus improving traffic congestion;

• Extension of the pedestrian footpath on the southern side of Merry Hill Road from the eastern side of Victoria Road to the proposed access of the residential development;

• Relocation of the zebra crossing to improve connectivity between the sports centre and the school;

• Widening a section of Merry Hill Road to the north western side of the site to address visibility issues.

10.28 It is considered that these highway improvements help to outweigh the harm of the

development on the Green Belt. It will retain the rural nature of Merry Hill Road, whilst helping to improve highway safety and traffic congestion issues in the locality.

Community benefit from the school and sports centre 10.29 St. Margaret’s School makes significant contribution to the local community, and

therefore its long term retention is important to retain these wider community benefits:

• The school is a major employer in the local area with 80% of the 200 staff

members being from the local area.

• Although the school is private, it provides bursaries for 10% of the school children.

• The school hosts the Bushey and Watford Festivals which are important recreational and leisure events for the local community.

• The school is the rehearsal and performance venue for Bushey Symphony

Orchestra.

• The school employs an archivist who acts as a regular link between the Bushey Museum and the school pupils. This helps to manage and archive local history and supports the local museum.

• The school often offers the use of its facilities and hall for charitable events, at no charge (in the past year there have been 6 charity fundraisers held at the school.

• The school hosts the meetings of the Watford and Bushey Guides and Brownies.

10.30 The St. Margaret’s School Sports Centre is also an important community facility

which relies on the on-going functioning of the school. It provides the following community benefits:

• The Local Fire Brigade practice emergency exercises in the schools

swimming pool.

• 1200 members of the public have membership to the sports centre. St. Margaret’s School transports children from two local state schools to use the sports centre and swimming pool free of charge.

• The application is funding two new sports pitches to the south of the sports centre.

10.31 It is clear from the above that St. Margaret’s School and the St. Margaret’s School

Sports Centre contribute significantly to the local community, and it is important for these facilities to be kept available to local residents.

Environment and landscape benefit and design considerations 10.32 The applicant has put forward the case that the proposed environmental and

landscape benefits of the development and the design of the proposed residential units constitute a very special circumstance. While it is recognised that these considerations have significant impacts on the openness of the Green Belt, they do not in their own right constitute ‘very special circumstances’. They have been carefully designed so as to help mitigate the impact of the development on the Green Belt, and these aspects are assessed in the relevant sections of the report below.

Conclusion 10.33 It is clear from the information provided that the quantum of development proposed is

necessary to enable the phase 1 works of St. Margaret’s School, to meet the existing and future needs of the community facility. The school also provides facilities for the use of the wider community, including the sports centre, which should be preserved. In addition, the works are also necessary for the continuing preservation and use of the Grade II Listed Building. The development is also funding improvements to the safety and operation of the surrounding highway network. It is considered that these factors for a case of very special circumstances which outweighs the harm of the residential development to the Green Belt. The proposal therefore complies with the NPPF (2012), policy CS13 of the Core Strategy (2013) and policies C1 and C5 of the Local Plan (2003).

Viability, affordable housing and Section 106 contributions Policy expectation 10.34 Policy CS21 of the Core Strategy (2013) seeks provision for on and off-site facilities,

services and improvements for which a need is known to arise from new residential development, in addition to obligations towards Affordable Housing, to be secured

through the use of individually negotiated planning obligations entered into by the Council under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act, on sites of 15 or more (gross). This is reiterated in policy R2 of the Local Plan (2003). The Planning Obligations SPD Parts A and B (2010) provide support in calculating the financial planning obligations required to mitigate the impact of residential development. In line with this SPD, and consultation with Hertfordshire County Council, the following contributions are sought for the proposed development:

10.35 Hertsmere Borough Council

Proposed contributions

Public Open Space £58,920.98

Public Leisure Facilities £1,020.10

Playing Fields £11,792.36

Greenways £4,534.66

Cemeteries £1,264.92

S106 Monitoring Contribution £3,003

Museums and cultural facilities £6,734

Total £87,270.02

Hertfordshire County Council

Proposed contributions

Primary Education £60,903

Secondary Education £66,519

Youth £1,293

Libraries £4,717

Sustainable Transport £19,500

Total £152,932

Overall Total £240,202.02

10.36 According to policy CS4 of the Core Strategy (2013) and the Affordable Housing SPD

(2008), the proposed development should provide 35% of units as affordable which equates to 9 affordable units. Of this percentage 75% should be delivered as social rented and/or affordable rent houses and the remainder as intermediate housing which would equate to 7 social rented properties and 2 for intermediate housing. The NPPF states that development proposals should meet the affordable housing need on site, unless off-site provision or a financial contribution of a broadly equivalent value can be robustly justified. In line with the requirements of the Affordable Housing SPD (2008) a commuted sum for a development of this scale would equate to £1,482,800.

10.37 The NPPF (2012) provides the national framework on the planning merits that are

considered when assessing the issue of the viability of a development. A key principle is to ensure that a proportionate evidence base approach is applied to the assessment and such undertaking requires careful attention to viability and deliverability of development. Paragraph 173 states that to ensure viability, the costs of any requirements likely to be applied to development should provide competitive returns to a willing landowner and willing developer to enable the development to be deliverable.

10.38 Paragraph 016 of the Planning Practice Guidance (PPG) advises that where the

scale of planning obligations and other costs may compromise the deliverability of the development, a viability assessment may be necessary. Paragraph 019 makes it clear that whilst the onus is on the applicant to prove that the planning obligation would cause the scheme to be unviable, it is also clear that the local planning authority should apply flexibility if the evidence demonstrates this.

Applicant’s position 10.39 The applicant’s proposes that the residential scheme is an ‘enabling development’ to

fund necessary extensions, maintenance and repair works to ensure the long term future of St. Margaret’s School. The applicant has stated that the land receipt generated through the disposal of the site will be used by St. Margaret’s School to directly fund these works. They therefore argue that the provision of any planning obligations, including affordable housing (on site provision, off site provision or commuted payment) would restrict the viability of the enabling project. The applicant proposes to provide £49,400 to fund S278 highway improvement works to mitigate the impact of the development on the surrounding highway network.

Principle of enabling development 10.40 In general, enabling development is a planning tool used to secure the

implementation of a proposal for the long term future and conservation of existing establishments. The essence of enabling development is that a scheme that would otherwise be unacceptable in planning terms is necessary to generate funds needed to secure the future of an existing establishment, subject to those needs being fully demonstrated. The principle of selling land for residential development to fund improved educational facilities at an existing school has been well established in planning and there are a number of recent appeal decisions which support this view.

10.41 An application for an enabling development of 75 residential units in the Green Belt

to fund works for a secondary school in St. Albans was allowed on appeal in 2011 (ref. APP/B1930/A/10/2142127). In this case no planning obligations were proposed (including no affordable housing), but it was clearly demonstrated that the funds of this development would secure the benefits to the school including new sports pitches, classrooms, as sports hall and an overall reduction in parking congestion. The Inspector accepted that the scheme would provide these much needed improvements and permitted the residential development to enable these works. In addition, a similar appeal was allowed in 2009 for the outline permission of 51 residential units in the Green Belt in Billericay, Essex. This was the enabling development for improvements to a secondary school. The Inspector considered that the cost of implementing the works to the school would be equivalent to the residual value of the land and therefore it would be unviable to provide planning obligations.

10.42 Therefore, whilst in general terms the enabling argument is established as a

legitimate planning tool, the concept has also been robustly tested at appeal and has found to be an acceptable mechanism for funding the long term future of educational facilities. Officers therefore accept the principle of an enabling development. However in order to establish why an enabling development of this scale is necessary, Officers have requested that a viability assessment has been submitted. The acceptability of the proposed development is subject to the value of the proposed school works being equivalent to the residual value of the land. If found to be the case, then Officers are will to accept that the benefits of the improvements to the school and the highway improvements outweigh the lack of planning obligations (including affordable housing provision).

Viability process 10.43 The applicant has submitted a financial viability appraisal which concludes that 26

units are necessary to raise sufficient funds to finance the proposed Phase 1 works to the school. It also concludes that any further planning obligations (including affordable housing provision), other than the £49,400 for S278 highway works, would make the scheme unviable. As with any submitted viability report, it is necessary to

have its contents independently reviewed by a different viability assessor acting on behalf of the Council.

10.44 The independent review undertaken by BPS Chartered Surveyors concludes that the

proposed works to the school realistically would cost within the region of £10.505m. It also concludes that in agreeing to pay this land price to the school, Cala Homes would generate a deficit. Therefore any reduction in the size of the residential development, or provision of planning obligations (including affordable housing) would give rise to a greater deficit which could prejudice the delivery of the scheme. Officers accepted the content of this submitted viability report.

10.45 In line with current Council procedure, this application was presented at an

Affordable Housing Forum, a group made up with representatives from the Councils Housing and Legal Departments and Senior Management. During this meeting concerns were raised about the robustness of this report and subsequent to this meeting it was considered that additional scrutiny of the submitted viability report be taken to ensure its robustness. Therefore a second independent assessment of the viability report was requested.

10.46 A second independent review has been undertaken by Savills. Owing to the amount

of time that has elapsed from the initial submission of the applicants viability report, there have been some changes in market prices and the appointment of contacts for specific work relating to the costs for the works to the school. Savills have also identified a cost saving for the physical works. There has therefore been a marginal change in the figures for the school works to £10.325m. Despite this, the independent review still concludes that the residual land value remains below the benchmark land value needed by the school to carry out the works.

Assessment 10.47 In light of the conclusions of the two separate independent viability assessments,

Officers accept that the value of the proposed works, being the benchmark land value (BLV), exceeds the residual land value. Therefore the provision of any financial planning obligations or affordable housing would render the residential scheme unviable, preventing the delivery of the proposed works to the school.

10.48 Although no planning obligations are proposed as part of the scheme, a S106 legal

agreement is still required to ensure the implementation and delivery of the school works. In addition, where schemes are unable to deliver policy compliant planning obligations or affordable housing provision, the Council seek a review mechanism to be included in the S106 legal agreement to ensure that an open book review takes place to review market changes. The Council’s legal department have advised that the delivery of the S278 highway improvement works can be secured by condition.

10.49 The proposed heads of terms of the S106 legal agreement are therefore as follows:

• Ensuring the delivery and substantial completion of the phase 1 school works before commencement of the residential development;

• Review mechanisms for both the school works and residential development in the form of an open book approach to include: - The GDV baseline (cannot be disclosed due to commercial sensitivity); - Trigger point for review (yet to be agreed); - ‘Clawback’ provision 50/50 split between the Council and the developer of an uplift of GDV baseline; - ‘Clawback’ provision is to be capped at the level which reflects the amount foregone in the first instance to ensure it is compliant with policy. In this case the cap would be at £1,722,202.02 (total of policy required affordable housing commuted sum.

Conclusion 10.50 Overall, it is considered that the enabling argument an established and legitimate

planning tool. The concept has been robustly tested at appeal and has found to be an acceptable mechanism for funding the long term future of educational facilities. In this instance, it is considered that the costs of the works to the school will be funded by the proposed residential development. The costs of these school works would be equivalent, if not greater than the value of the land following the residential development. Therefore, it has been clearly demonstrated that the residential development would provide the funds for the much needed preservation and restoration of an existing heritage asset and educational facilities.

Design 10.51 The NPPF (2012), policy CS22 of the Core Strategy (2013) and policy D21 of the

Local Plan (2003) seek to ensure that the design and setting of new development respects or improves the character and quality of an area. Policy CS13 of the Core Strategy (2013) and policy C4 of the Local Plan (2003) state that all development should protect the openness of the Green Belt.

Spatial layout 10.52 Part D of the Planning and Design Guide SPD (2013) states that the spatial form of

development needs to be based on the perimeter block approach. The design and layout of the new dwellings should ensure continuity to the street frontage by adopting continuous building lines and creating enclosure (close the gaps between buildings), which help frame the streets. The units need to face the public realm to create active frontages and to make a clear distinction between public and private spaces. There is also the need for buildings to turn corners (i.e. enclosure) which avoids the appearance of blank walls.

10.53 Existing residential development in the surrounding area comprises a mix of dwelling

houses and flatted schemes. To the north west of the site, are large detached dwellings, within large plots set back from the street and fronting onto Merry Hill Road with large rear gardens. To the east of the site, residential development comprises detached, semi-detached dwellings on smaller, narrow plots with strong continuous building lines.

10.54 The application site is heavily constrained by its location in the Green Belt and the

retention of the Grade II Listed Barn and 3 locally listed buildings. The proposed layout has been designed to give visual prominence to the heritage assets and to create a strong defensible boundary to protect the openness of the Green Belt. The development has been split into three different character areas:

• Cottage style dwellings frame the entrance to the development from Merry Hill Road and respect the setting of the Grade II Listed Barn.

• Two large feature apartment buildings frame the entrance to the southern end of the site.

• Barn/stable style buildings framing a landscaped courtyard area to the south west of the site.

10.55 The two existing properties fronting onto Merry Hill Road, Hillbrow and the Grade II

Listed Barn, are to be retained which provides continuity to the street frontage and respects the existing building line. The wider built development has been contained to the western side of the main access road with units fronting onto the open Green Belt creating a strong continuous building line. This creates a strong defensive boundary with the front elevations being exposed to the Green Belt to provide a more

settled appearance of the development. In addition, the corner units have been designed to be dual-frontage which also helps to reinforce the Green Belt boundary which will deter future urban sprawl and protect the openness of the Green Belt.

10.56 The proposed layout has also been carefully designed to provide visual prominence

to the retained heritage assets. Merry Hill House has been retained as the dominant feature of the site, framing the entrance to southern end of the site with an ancillary courtyard style development to the rear of the property. This landscaped courtyard, framed by barn-style buildings, reinforces the rural nature of the site and creates a sense of enclosure with the buildings fronting onto the public realm.

10.57 Overall, the spatial layout successfully contains the development by creates a strong

boundary with the surrounding open Green Belt land and retains the heritage assets as prominent features of the site.

Spacing and setting 10.58 Part D of the Planning and Design Guide SPD 2013 advises that new residential

development should achieve a separation distance of between 1m to 2m from the side boundary depending on the levels of separation in the area. Residential development in the surrounding area varies with separation distances ranging from 0m to 8.6m. The proposed dwellings fronting onto Merry Hill Road, Hillbrow and the Grade II Listed barn retain large separation distances which is characteristic of the adjoining properties. The proposed dwelling houses on the site have separation distances varying between 0m and 2.5m. This is considered to be consistent with development in the surrounding area and significant sky gaps are achieved throughout the site to views through properties, preventing terracing between properties. The setting of the proposed rural style dwellings is considered acceptable due to compliance with planning policy and given the smaller separation distances of other residential properties within the wider area.

Built form 10.59 Policy H8 states that the size, height, mass and appearance of the new dwellings

should be harmonious with and not over dominate the scale or adversely affect the character of adjacent development. The Hertsmere Planning and Design Guide, Part D of the Planning and Design Guide 2013 develops this policy further and states that careful design solutions should be applied ensure that proposals do not overly dominate the surroundings.

10.60 There are three different building typologies proposed. To the north of the site,

cottage style dwellings are proposed and to south west of site the dwellings are based on a traditional barn/stable design. These buildings have adopted an overall design concept of modest, rural dwellings. The dwellings are all one and a half storeys in height with traditional roof-pitched gable end roofs. The third building typology is the new build flat building which is designed to complement the existing locally listed Merry Hill House. This building is two storeys in height with an ancillary extension which is also two storeys but set down from the main ridge height. The height of the proposed dwellings is considered to be suitable for the rural setting of the development.

10.61 The built form of residential development in Merry Hill Road are generally detached,

two storey structures, with widths greater than their depths, incorporating a range of design characteristics. The built form of the existing dwellings to the east of the site tend to be more suburban given that they are on the urban edge of Bushey. The built form of the proposed dwellings replicates that of a rural context. The proposed elevations adopt the built form of rural barns and cottages with, projecting gables,

various set backs of the front building line and the use of dormer windows. These elements have broken up the mass of the built form successfully and is considered to have an acceptable relationship to the wider Green Belt and surrounding development.

Design and architectural approach 10.62 The proposed scheme will complement the local vernacular, by the use of similar

materials, details and features. A traditional rural, barn like approach has been adopted in the architectural detailing. This is demonstrated by the introduction of low eaves lines, low ridge heights, brick plinth detailing, pitched dormer windows and traditionally proportioned gable wings. The simple roof design and introduction of chimneys compliment this approach.

10.63 Overall, in architectural terms there is a variation to the unit types to give the site

greater visual interest. However, the development will use a unifying material palette to ensure an element of continuity throughout the scheme. The submitted Design and Access Statement demonstrates that the predominant materials to be used will be brickwork and black weatherboarding. This is complementary to the retain heritage assets and consistent with development in the surrounding area. In order to ensure that these materials are appropriate, a condition is recommended for samples of these materials to be submitted and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Conclusion 10.64 Overall, no objection is raised in terms of the design approach adopted for the

proposed development. In addition, the setting and spatial layout are considered to be sympathetic to the Green Belt setting and retain the prominence of the heritage assets. The proposal therefore meets the requirements of the NPPF (2012), policies CS13 and CS22 of the Core Strategy (2013) and policies C4 and D21 of the Local Plan (2003).

Heritage 10.65 The NPPF (2012) and policy CS14 seek to protect and enhance the historic

environment. Policies E13 and E16 state that planning permission should be refused if the development is harmful to a listed building or its setting. Policy E18 ensures that development protects locally listed buildings.

Conversion and alterations to Grade II Listed Barn 10.66 Paragraph 131 of the NPPF states that it is important to take account of the

desirability of sustaining and enhancing the significance of heritage assets and putting them to viable uses consistent with their conservation. The application seeks to convert the Grade II Listed Barn into a residential property. The barn has been redundant since the late 1980s and it is considered that its conversion to a residential property will be sustainable, viable and secure its future conservation.

10.67 The Grade II Listed Barn dates from the late seventeenth or early eighteenth

centuries. The barn sits on a brick base and is externally finished in in black weather board with a tiled roof. Although it has had a significant amount of its original fabric replaced, it retains its original plan form and overall elevation treatments. The barn has an H-shaped plan with a long central range including a central dormer window and two flanking gabled cross-wings to the east and west. The cross wings have open gable ends.

10.68 The applicant has submitted a Heritage Statement which provides an assessment of the history, development and physical remains of the Grade II Listed Barn. It concludes that there is limited significance and that its form has been substantially altered since its original listing. While the building retains some of its original appearance, there is clear evidence of recent, substantial alteration of the barn’s structure, fabric and appearance. Despite this, the applicant has not applied for the barn to be de-listed and therefore the impact must still be fully assessed.

10.69 The original proposal sought to dismantle and reconstruct the barn. This essentially

constitutes demolition of a listed building and resulted in a principle objection without listed building consent. In addition, English Heritage and the Council’s Conservation Officer raised objection to the design approach of the extension and conversion of the barn to a residential dwelling. It was considered that the extent of internal subdivision was unacceptable as it would undermine the open quality and uncluttered volume of the roof which are one of the significant features of the listed building. The proposed single storey rear extension would project beyond the centre of the rear elevation. It would be visually overdominant, being wider and projecting further than the existing cross wings. The extension would be largely glazed, which is out of keeping with the simple material approach to the barn. In addition, the proposed extension would result in the loss of the existing central dormer window which is an important feature of the listed building. The proposed front porch would appear too domestic and is not appropriate for a barn. It therefore was considered that the proposal would harm the significance of the listed building through the loss of historic fabric and the barn’s agricultural character.

10.70 Through in depth negotiations involving the Council’s Conservation Officer, the

proposal has been significantly improved. The application no longer proposes the demolition and reconstruction of the listed barn. It is proposed to retain the barn in situ and its character and appearance will be largely unaltered. In addition, the design approach has also been improved to address the concerns previously raised. The proposal seeks to retain and use the existing openings to the barn. The single storey rear extension has been removed which allows the rear dormer window to be retained. The internal arrangements and associated volumes of the barn and are no longer subdivided into a standard domestic layout. This retains the significant spatial qualities, historic associations and fabric.

10.71 In order to achieve additional habitable floorspace whilst retaining the historic

significance of the barn, a new ancillary building is proposed to the western side of the barn connected by a glazed link. The Conservation Officer has confirmed that this end of the barn has lost most of its original historic fabric and therefore the introduction of an opening for the glazed link would not result in harm to significant elements of the barn. The proposed ancillary building is simple in design and will not detract from the listed building. It is externally finished in traditional materials, predominantly red/brown brick with weather boarding detail and a clay tiled roof to complement the listed building.

10.72 Overall, it is considered that the amendments to the Grade II Listed Barn proposal

have overcome the objections and concerns previously raised and will ensure that the listed building is retained in a sustainable and viable use. The new design approach also retains the overall historic and architectural interest. The proposal is therefore acceptable, subject to a number of conditions relating to landscaping, occupation, materials, construction methods, protection and building recording.

Impact on setting of Grade II Listed Barn 10.73 The Grade II Listed barn is located on the northern edge of the site, fronting onto

Merry Hill Road. The Barn and Merry Hill Farmhouse are the most significant

elements of the original farm remaining on the site today. Their physical relationship and the road form key elements to the setting of the listed barn.

10.74 The Conservation Officer raised concerns that the originally submitted scheme had a

negative impact on the setting of the Grade II Listed barn and the locally listed Merry Hill Farmhouse. It was considered that the introduction of hard and semi-formal landscape elements and boundary treatments resulted in a loss of the physical and visual relationship between the barn and the farm house. In addition, the reduction in plot sizes and the encroachment of domestic architectural development undermines the relationship between the two properties.

10.75 Negotiations with the applicant sought to reduce the impact of the new development

on the setting of the listed building. Amended plans have been submitted which demonstrate that the visual relationship between Merry Hill Farmhouse and the listed barn has been strengthened by linked surfacing and the introduction of new landscaping elements within the curtilage of the listed barn. In addition, strengthening elements of the boundary treatments to neighbouring plots has helped to reduce the impact of the new development. These changes are considered to have mitigated much of the impact of the development on the setting of the listed building. However, the Conservation Officer still has concerns that further measures could be taken to reduce the impact. Therefore, conditions for a robust landscaping scheme are included in the permission to ensure that there is no unacceptable impact on the setting of the Grade II Listed Building.

10.76 It is considered that the proposed amendments to the scheme have significantly

mitigated the impact of the development on the setting of the listed building, however landscaping conditions are also included to further achieve this and retain the historic relationship between the Listed barn and the locally listed farmhouse. The proposal therefore meets the requirements of the NPPF (2012), PPG (2014), policy CS14 of the Core Strategy (2013) and policy E16 of the Local Plan (2003).

Conversion of Locally Listed Buildings 10.77 The application seeks to retain three Locally Listed Buildings on the site. It is

proposed to convert Merry Hill Farmhouse and Hillbrow into single residential dwellings and Merry Hill House into seven self-contained private flats.

10.78 Merry Hill House was originally constructed in 1740 as a residential dwelling. It was

largely extended in 1885 and is currently one of the educational buildings serving St. Margaret’s School. Merry Hill House is externally finished in red brick and has a hipped slate roof with two decorated chimneys. It has a strong design, typical of the Georgian and Victorian period and retains most of its original features. The application seeks to retain these original features and remove the more recent extensions. The proposed two storey extension respects the character and design of the locally listed building and is considered to be a more sympathetic addition than the existing extension. There is no objection to the building being reverted to its original residential use.

10.79 Merry Hill House is located to the southern end of the site and fronts onto the open

space. It is historically the key element of the development on the site. It has been sought to retain this building as the dominant feature of the development by framing the entrance to the southern part of the site and introducing an ancillary courtyard-style development to the rear of the property. The Conservation Officer has raised concerns that the layout of the development to the north of Merry Hill House results in the building being undermined. However, Officers are of the view that the relationship of the locally listed building with the courtyard development and retention of its frontage onto the open space maintain the historical presence of the building in

its wider setting. 10.80 Hillbrow was originally constructed in 1909 as a residential dwelling and is currently

used as an educational building as part of St. Margaret’s School. There is no objection to it being reverted back to residential use. Hillbrow has a strong design with domestic arts and crafts style detailing and retains most of its original features. It is brick built with pebble-dash render and has a hipped tiled roof with three decorated chimney stacks. The property is two storeys with habitable room accommodation. The application does not propose any alterations to the external appearance of the property.

10.81 Hillbrow is located to the north western side of the site and sits on an extensive plot

with views over the open Green Belt land to the south. The application seeks to subdivide parts of the rear end of the plot to serve units 19, 20 and 21. Although this restricts the uninterrupted views of the wider landscape from Hillbrow, it retains a substantial plot size and rear garden, thus protecting its prominence on its plot. In addition, the proposed landscaping scheme isolates Hillbrow retaining its significance as a residential property in its own right.

10.82 Merry Hill Farmhouse is a two storey, yellow brick building with red brick detailing

and a hipped slate rood and two decorated chimney stacks, located at the northern end of the site. The building has strong design typical of the Regency period and retains most of its original features. The farmhouse forms part of a group of buildings, and its relationship with the Grade II Listed Barn is particularly important, as discussed above.

10.83 The application proposes to retain the building as a residential unit. It is also

proposed to demolish the existing two storey rear extension and introduce a single storey rear extension and single storey side adjoining garage. The extensions are modest in size and are in keeping with the design of the original building. They are sensitively located so they appear subservient to the main dwelling and retain the key architectural features of the original property. The impact of the development on the setting of Merry Hill Farmhouse is addressed above with the Grade II Listed Barn.

Demolition of the former Stables building 10.84 The NPPF states that in assessing applications that directly affect non-designated

heritage assets should have regard to the scale of any harm or loss and the significance of the heritage asset.

10.85 The application seeks to demolish the former Stables Building. This building was put

on Hertsmere’s Local List because it has group value: it was the former stables and coach house to Merry Hill House. The former Stables building in itself contributes very little to the local built environment in terms of its architectural style and appearance, which are not identified on the Local List. It has been significantly altered during its use as an educational building and therefore is considered to have minimal historical interest.

10.86 The applicant has submitted a Heritage Statement which identifies the extent of

alterations to the former Stables building since its original construction. The justification for the demolition of the former Stables building is largely based on the fact that it has low significance as a non-designated historic asset and that many of its key features have been lost as a result of significant alteration. The principle elevation has been considerably altered with the introduction of new fenestration and the addition of the large canopy detracts from and conceals the original façade of the building. In addition, other features have been removed such as the carriage arch, with its remains being largely concealed by the new fenestration. The Conservation

Officer has not raised objection to the demolition of this non-designated heritage asset. The building is to be replaced with a higher quality building which also respects the character and relationship with Merry Hill House. It is therefore not considered that its demolition would significantly impact on the historic environment of the area or the setting of Merry Hill House. Officers therefore raise no objection to its demolition.

Conclusion 10.87 No objections are raised in terms of the impact of the development on the Grade II

Listed Barn or Locally Listed Buildings, and the demolition of the former Stables building is considered to be acceptable. The proposal is therefore in line with the requirements of the NPPF (2012), policy CS14 of the Core Strategy (2013) and policies E13, E16 and E18 of the Local Plan (2003).

Car parking and highway implications Policy 10.88 The NPPF (2012) and policies M2 and M12 of the Local Plan (2003) seek to ensure

that development proposals are only be permitted in locations where the highway network and the environment can accommodated the amount and type of transport movement likely to be generated. Policy CS25 of the Core Strategy (2013) and the Car Parking Standards SPD (revised 2013) seek to ensure that adequate off street parking is provided on new developments.

Car parking provision 10.89 The Parking Standards SPD (revised 2013) requires all new residential development

to provide adequate off street parking. Car parking provision is determined by the number of bedrooms, and the requirements are as follows:

10.90 • 1 bedroom units = 1.5 spaces per unit

• 2/3 bedroom units = 2 spaces per unit

• 5 bedroom units = 4 spaces per unit

• 6 bedroom = 5 spaces per unit 10.91 The guidance also states that houses with additional habitable rooms on upper floors

should provide an additional 1 car parking space per habitable room. 10.92 The 7x 3-bedroom houses and 8x 2-bedroom flats each have 2 off street car parking

spaces and the 7x 5-bedroom houses each have 4 off street car parking spaces. The proposed 6-bedroom unit has a large games room on the upper floor and therefore should provide a total of 6 car parking spaces. The area of hard surface to the front of the property is sufficient to provide 6 car parking spaces. The 3x 1-bedroom flats should provide a total of 4.5 car parking spaces. Each unit has 1 allocated space and there is one communal space which equates to 4 car parking spaces. The overall proposal is 0.5 car parking spaces shortfall of the Council’s Car Parking requirements.

10.93 The car parking spaces provided all meet the Council’s required car parking

dimensions, 2.4m x 4.8m and the internal dimensions of the garages meet the required 3m x 4.8m.

10.94 This shortfall of 0.5 car parking spaces across the entire site is not considered to

result in any indiscriminate car parking that would impact on the safety and operation of the highway, in accordance with policy CS25 of the Core Strategy (2013) and the

NPPF (2012). Access 10.95 There are currently two existing vehicular accesses within the red line of the site set

on the southern side of Merry Hill Road. The western access serves the Infant Department. The eastern access serves the remaining 4 buildings and the sports centre, which is also served by another access outside the red line. There is a large car parking area to the front of the site and within the site, the buildings are connected by a network of internal footpaths. The application proposes the closure of the western access and upgrades the eastern access to serve the residential development. The sports centre will only be served by one vehicular access outside of the red line. The eastern vehicular access will be reconfigured, providing vehicular movements in both directions and serving the proposed internal road network.

10.96 The Highways Authority at Hertfordshire County Council has raised no objection to

the proposed access arrangements. The width of the proposed internal road network narrows from 5.5m at the vehicle access, to 4.8m at the northwest end of the site, and 4.2m to the southwest of the site. This is sufficient to allow access for emergency and refuse vehicles. In addition, the layout of the internal road network will help to minimise the dominance of parking areas within the proposed development. A Transport Statement has been submitted which demonstrates that visibility splay at the proposed access meets the requirements of the Manual for Streets Design Guidance and is therefore acceptable.

Impact of development on existing highway 10.97 The Transport Statement which has been submitted states that the proposed 26

residential units is expected to generate an additional 4 trips in and 15 trips out of the site during the AM peak and 13 trips in and 7 trips out during the PM peak period. The number of trips generated by the school is expected to remain unaltered. It is not considered that this increase in traffic movement will impact on the safety and operation of the existing highway, in line with policies M2 and M12 of the Local Plan 2003.

Wider highway works 10.98 Despite the fact that the vehicular movements generated by the proposed

development are not considered to materially impact the existing highway network, concerns have been raised by neighbouring residents and the Ward Councillors in terms of the existing highway conditions. As a result the applicant has negotiated some off-site highway improvement works with the Highways Authority as part of the development. These works consist of:

• New vehicle accesses to the St. Margaret’s Sports Centre and St. Margaret’s

School. This includes alterations to the internal road network on the northern school site which will improve pick up and drop off arrangements for cars and coaches, thus improving traffic congestion;

• Extension of the pedestrian footpath on the southern side of Merry Hill Road from the eastern side of Victoria Road to the proposed access of the residential development;

• Relocation of the zebra crossing to improve connectivity between the sports centre and the school;

• Widening a section of Merry Hill Road to the north western side of the site to address visibility issues.

10.99 These proposed highway works are far reaching and will help to improve the existing

highway related issues created by the school as raised by residents and Members through pre-application discussions. In addition, this will mitigate any perceived adverse impact the development may have on the road network. These works have been agreed with the Hertfordshire County Council in a S278 Agreement and will be bound by the legal agreement to ensure that they are implemented prior to commencement of the residential development.

Conclusion 10.100 Overall Officers raise no objection in relation to the impact of the development on the

existing highway network and the car parking provision. The proposal complies with the NPPF (2012), policies M2 and M12 of the Local Plan (2003), policy CS25 of the Core Strategy (2013) and the Parking Standards SPD (revised 2013).

Landscape strategy 10.101 Policy CS12 of the Core Strategy (2013) states that all development proposals must

conserve and enhance the natural environment of the Borough. Policy E7 and E8 of the Local Plan (2003) have been retained by the Core Strategy (2013). Policy E7 requires trees and hedgerows which contribute to visual amenity to be retained and protected. If development is approved which would result in the removal of trees and/or hedgerows, equivalent and appropriate replacement planting will be required. Policy E8 states that on sites where trees and/or hedgerows are to be retained, proposals must provide sufficient space between trees and/or hedgerows and buildings to avoid affecting the existing and proposed landscape features.

Trees 10.102 There are no trees on the site which are protected by a Tree Preservation Order.

However, there are a number of trees which provide significant amenity value to the area and screen the built development from wider views of the Green Belt. These are the highest quality specimens on the site and are located to the southern end of the site. It is proposed to retain these trees as part of the proposal. A condition is included to ensure that the retained trees are protected during the construction period.

10.103 The application seeks to remove a total of 44 of the existing trees to allow for the

residential development. However, a scheme of replanting is proposed to mitigate this loss. The Tree Officer considers that all of the trees to be removed are low quality specimens with the exception of one moderate quality weeping ash. However, although this provides some amenity value to the surrounding area, the Tree Officer has confirmed that it is a small specimen with little potential to develop. It is therefore considered that any amenity value lost by the removal of these trees can be mitigated with a suitable landscaping scheme. These replacement trees will help to retain the verdant and rural setting of the development and will contribute towards the visual amenity of the site and surrounding area. Therefore, subject to conditions relating to details of these replacement trees, no objections are raised.

Landscaping 10.104 The application seeks to retain the large grass/meadow area to the south of the site

which provides significant amenity value to the Green Belt setting of the development. This will be maintained by the residents of the development through agreement in a site management plan. A condition is included in the permission to ensure that this is considered to be sufficient to ensure the maintenance of the areas of public open space.

10.105 The application results in reduction in the level of hardstanding and increases the level of soft landscaping. The proposed units are fronted by grassed areas and a number of new trees. Areas of shared surface, private drives and parking bays are proposed to be constructed in permeable block paving, and the access road in permeable tarmac.The proposal minimises the use of hard surfacing and introduces soft landscaping to compliment the character and appearance of the area and to improve the setting of the proposed buildings and openness of the Green Belt.

10.106 The existing boundary of the site itself comprises mature trees, vegetation and

hedgerow. Due to the nature of the educational use on the site, there is very little formal landscaping within the existing site. However, there are brick walls, timber fencing and picket fencing partially surrounding some of the existing buildings. The proposed boundary treatment to demarcate the residential units will be predominantly hedgerow or brick walls. This respects the rural approach to the development and minimises the impact of the development on the openness of the Green Belt.

Conclusion 10.107 Overall, Officers consider that the proposed soft and hard landscaping has been

carefully designed to respect the Green Belt setting of the development. A condition is recommended for further details to be submitted to ensure that the landscaping enhances the setting of the listed building and will be implemented and retained as approved by the Local Planning Authority. The proposal therefore complies with the NPPF (2012), policy CS12 of the Core Strategy (2013), and policies E7 and E8 of the Local Plan (2003).

Residential amenity 10.108 The NPPF 2012 states that development should seek to secure a good standard of

amenity for all existing and future occupants of land and buildings. Local Plan 2003 policy H8 states that developments should not have an adverse impact on the privacy, outlook and amenity of neighbouring residents. Part D of the Planning and Design Guide 2013 provides standards which should be met to achieve acceptable levels of amenity for existing and proposed residents.

Impact on existing residents 45 degree line 10.109 Part D of the Planning and Design Guide 2013 states that new development should

not breach a 45 degree line from the neighbouring habitable room windows. The only property adjoining the site is Littlecote which is located to the north western side of the site. The proposed development would breach a 45 degree line from the nearest habitable window of this property. However this breach would occur 49m away and so there would be no detrimental impact on the outlook for this property or loss of light, in line with the BRE guidelines.

Privacy 10.110 Part D of the Planning and Design Guide SPD 2013 advises that directly opposing

windows serving habitable rooms should be at least 20m away from each other. There are no windows proposed which directly oppose existing habitable room windows. Concerns have been raised by neighbours that units 19, 20 and 21 would result in a loss of privacy to the rear garden of Littlecote. Part D of the Planning and Design Guide SPD (2013) states that the first three metres of a residential rear garden’s length is likely to be its most private area. The nearest proposed window facing Littlecote is approximately 38m down the rear garden. In addition, this window

is set back 15m from the boundary with the rear garden of Littlecote. The proposed development therefore will not result in an undue loss of privacy to this neighbouring property.

Impact on future residents Separation distances 10.111 Part D of the Planning and Design Guide SPD 2013 advises that directly opposing

windows serving habitable rooms should be at least 20m away from each other. This separation distance is exceeded between most of the units but in the two flatted buildings, units 8, 10, 14 and 17 have opposing habitable room windows which are only separated by 8m. However, in all cases these are secondary windows as the rooms affected for the 4 units are dual aspect with a primary window that is not breached. Therefore there will be no undue loss of privacy to the future residents of these properties.

On site amenity 10.112 Policy H8 of the Local Plan 2003 and Part D of the Planning and Design Guide SPD

2013 require all new residential developments to have adequate private useable amenity space. Provision of useable amenity space is determined by number of bedrooms, and the requirements are as follows:

Houses:

• 2/3 bedroom houses = 60m2 private amenity space

• 5+ bedroom houses = 100m2 private amenity space 10.113 The plans submitted indicate that all the houses exceed these requirements and

comply with Part D of the Planning and Design Guide SPD (2013). Flats:

• 1 bedroom flats = 20m2 amenity space (communal or allocated to individual units)

• 2 bedroom flats = 30m2 private amenity space (communal or allocated to individual units)

10.114 Therefore for 3x 1 bedroom flats and 8x 2 bedroom flats, a total of 300m2 should be

provided. A total of more than 13000m2 (a combination of communal and private amenity space) has been provided which well exceeds the Council’s requirements in line with Part D of the Planning and Design Guide SPD (2013).

Residential internal areas 10.115 Part D of the Planning and Design Guide SPD (2013) states that new residential

units should achieve the following minimum gross internal areas: Houses:

• 2 storey units = 107m2 minimum gross internal areas

• 3 storey units = 113m2 minimum gross internal areas Flats:

• 1 bedroom flats = 37m2 minimum gross internal areas

• 2 bedroom flats = 61m2 minimum gross internal areas 10.116 In addition, it states that the minimum floor areas for bedrooms required are 8m² for

single bedrooms and 12m² for double rooms. The plans submitted indicate that all

the bedrooms exceed these requirements in line with the Part D of the Planning and Design Guide SPD (2013).

Conclusion 10.117 Overall there are therefore no objections raised by officers in relation to impact on the

amenity of the existing or future residents and the proposal complies with the NPPF (2012), policy H8 of the Local Plan (2003) and Part D of the Planning and Design Guide SPD (2013).

Biodiversity and wildlife 10.118 Paragraph 118 of the NPPF (2012) states that local planning authorities should aim

to conserve and enhance biodiversity. Policy CS12 of the Core Strategy 2013 states that all developments must conserve and enhance the natural environment of the Borough. Policy E3 of the Local Plan (2003) states that planning permission should not be granted for development which could adversely impact on species protected by Schedules 1, 5 or 8 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, as amended.

10.119 The applicant has submitted a habitat survey and number of ecological surveys

which assess the impact the development could have on bats, reptiles or great crested news. The habitat survey concluded that some of the buildings on site were potentially suitable for roosting bats and nesting birds. The semi-improved grassland, trees, woodland, hedgerow and scrub areas offer potential habitat for reptiles, badgers, bats and birds. It recommended further reptile, great crested newt and bat activity surveys of the site, which have been submitted and had the following findings:

Bats 10.120 The bat activity survey found no evidence for any past of present roosting activity

within the former Stables building, preparatory classroom building, Merry Hill Farmhouse, or the barn. Evidence of Common Pipistrelle Bats was recorded in Merry Hill House and Hillbrow. The report concluded that this species is common and widespread in England, often associated with urban areas, and accordingly any such use would be of no more than low conservation significance for bats.

10.121 A single bat was recorded returning to a roosting site within the southern aspect of

Merry Hill House. This roost was assessed has being sporadically used by one bat, or a small number of bats. The proposed extension works to Merry Hill House are limited to the northern aspect of the building, and therefore removed from the location recorded to be used by roosting bats. Nonetheless, any works to the external fabric of the building, particularly the southern aspect has the potential to affect roosting bats.

10.122 Bat droppings were recorded within the roof void (by loft hatch) of HIllbrow in

September 2013 and 2014. No further evidence of any use of the building was recorded. As a result, Hillbrow appears to have been accessed by one bat, or a small number of bats, at most.

10.123 The report also noted that the buildings and features recorded to be used by bats will

be fully retained, albeit subject to conversion / refurbishment to provide residential accommodation. The buildings would be anticipated to continue to provide roosting opportunities for bats in the long term in line with the current levels of use and, subject to the mitigation measures. The proposals would appear unlikely to result in any offence in regard to bat species under the legislation, such that licensing would appear to be unnecessary.

Reptiles 10.124 The full reptile survey from April-August 2013 found that although there was suitable

habitat on the site, no reptiles were recorded. Great Crested Newts 10.125 The Great Crested Newt survey from August 2013 found that Great Crested Newts

were not found in the survey area and were not considered to be present within the site of ponds within 250m of the site.

10.126 Hertfordshire Ecology has been consulted and their Ecology Advisor concluded that

an appropriate survey methodology, evaluation and analysis of the habitats and species present or potentially present have been carried out by the consultants. The therefore consider that the proposed development would not impact any statutory or non-statutory site of conservation importance. The results of the bat surveys and level of bat activity suggest that no bats or roosts will be harmed during the proposed works and as such an EPS licence appears to be unnecessary. It is advised that the precautionary and mitigation measures to protect bats suggested in the 2014 Bar Report are implemented. They have recommended the inclusion of informatives relating to bats, birds and great crested newts.

10.127 The proposal therefore considered unlikely to adversely impact on any protected

species, and is compliant with the NPPF (2012), policy CS12 of the Core Strategy (2013) and policy E3 of the Local Plan (2003).

Waste and refuse 10.128 Policy H8 of the Hertsmere Local Plan (2003) states that adequate provision should

be made for storage of refuse and recyclable materials. Part D of the Planning and Design Guide (2013) and the Interim Technical Note for Waste Storage Provision (2014) outlines the various requirements for bin storage.

10.129 The plans demonstrate that each house would have sufficient individual waste

storage provision, within 25m of the collection point by refuse vehicles. With regards to the flats a sufficient area has been provided to accommodate the eurobins required to serve this part of the development. Suitable areas for the storage of waste and refuse have therefore been provided.

10.130 The proposal therefore meets the requirements of policy H8 of the Local Plan (2003),

part D of the Planning and Design Guide SPD (2013) and the Interim Technical Note for Waste Storage Provision (2014).

Environmental impact 10.131 The NPPF (2012), NPPG (2014), policy CS16 of the Core Strategy (2013) and policy

D3 of the Local Plan (2003) seek to ensure that development proposals do not create an unacceptable level of risk to occupiers of a site, the local community and the wider environment.

Drainage and flood risk 10.132 The application site is located in Flood zone 1 and is larger than 1 hectare in size and

therefore a flood risk assessment has been submitted by the applicant, in line with the requirements of the NPPF. This flood risk assessment concludes that there are no records of the site having been affected by flooding from any source. The

impermeable area of the site will be reduced by the proposal. The Environment Agency has reviewed the flood risk assessment and has raised no objection to the application, subject to the inclusion of a condition relating to surface water drainage. The Council’s drainage department have also raised no objections, subject to conditions relating to surface water drainage and the submission of a drainage impact study. Officers therefore consider that the proposed development is acceptable in terms of flood risk and drainage.

Sustainability 10.133 The applicant has submitted a Sustainability Statement which includes a Code for

Sustainable Homes pre-assessment confirming that the proposed dwellings can meet Code for Sustainable Homes Level 3. This is non-compliant with policy CS17of the Core Strategy (2013) which requires new developments to achieve the Code for Sustainable Homes Level 4.

10.134 The key elements of the sustainability strategy, as outlined in the Sustainability

Statement, are as follows:

• Heating and hot water supplied through gas condensing boilers

• Air tightness standards exceed building regulation requirements by at least 50%

• High level of sound insulation

• High levels of daylight to habitable rooms

• External lighting positioned, controlled and focused to provide efficient, safe and secure access

• Water saving measures

• Recycling facilities and Waste Management Plan

• Sustainable Urban Drainage System

• Secure cycle parking

• 75% of timber to be from sustainable sources 10.135 The submitted Energy Demand Statement states that the proposed fabric and

enhanced heating strategy shows a saving of 1242kg CO2 which represents a 2.82% over a Building Regulation compliant dwelling. This meets the mandatory requirements of the Code for Sustainable Homes Level 3.

10.136 Although the proposal is not policy-compliant with the requirements of policy CS17,

the fact that the proposal meets the Code for Sustainable Homes Level 3 is commendable and there are other benefits of the scheme which are considered to outweigh this non-compliance. Officers therefore do not raise objection on sustainability grounds.

Equality and diversity 10.137 The Equality Act 2010 came into force in April 2011. Section 149 of the Act

introduced the public sector equality duty, which requires public authorities to have ‘due regard’ to the need to eliminate discrimination on the grounds of the relevant protected characteristics, namely: age, disability, gender reassignment, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion and belief, sex and sexual orientation, and to advance equality of opportunity.

10.138 Section 149 of the Act provides:

(1) A public authority must, in the exercise of its function, have due regard to the need to

a. Eliminate discrimination, harassment, victimisation and any other conduct that is prohibited under the Act;

b. Advance equality of opportunity between persons who share a relevant protected characteristics and persons who do not share it;

c. Foster good relations between persons who share a relevant protected characteristics and persons who do not share it.

(2) A person who is not a public authority but who exercises public functions must, in the exercise of those functions, have due regard to the matters mentioned in subsection (1) (3) Having due regard to the need to advance equality of opportunity between persons who share a relevant characteristic and persons who do not share it involves having due regard in particular to the need to

a. Remove or minimise disadvantages suffered by persons who share a relevant protected characteristic that are connected to that characteristic;

b. Take steps to meet the needs of persons who share a relevant protected characteristic that are different from the needs of persons who do not share it;

c. Encourage persons who share a relevant protected characteristic to participate in public life or in any other activity in which participation by such persons is disproportionately low.

(4) The steps involved in meeting the needs of disabled persons that are different from the needs of persons who are not disabled include, in particular, steps to take account of disabled person’s disabilities (5) Having due regard to the need to foster good relations between persons who share a relevant protected characteristic and persons who do not share it involves having due regard in particular, to the need to

a. Tackle prejudice, and b. Promote understanding

(6) Compliance with the duties in this section may involve treating some persons more favourably than others; but that is not be to be taken as permitting conduct that would otherwise be prohibited by or under this Act. (7) The relevant protected characteristics are:

• Age

• Disability

• Gender reassignment

• Pregnancy and maternity

• Race

• Religion or belief

• Sex

• Sexual orientation The new public sector equality duty covers the following eight protected characteristics: age, disability, gender reassignment, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion or belief, sex and sexual orientation. Public authorities also need to have due regard to the need to eliminate unlawful discrimination against someone because of their marriage or civil partnership status.

10.139 In determining this application the Committee is required to have regard to its

statutory obligations under the Equality Act 2010. Under the Act, a public authority must, in the exercise of its functions, have due regard to the need to: • eliminate discrimination, harassment and victimisation and any • other conduct that is prohibited by or under this Act; • advance equality of opportunity between persons who share a

• relevant protected characteristic and persons who do not share it; • foster good relations between persons who share a relevant • protected characteristic and persons who do not share it

10.140 In relation to this specific application, the application has been submitted with a

planning statement which advises that much of the existing facilities are in need of significant refurbishment and parts are almost no longer fit for purpose. Therefore, in order for the school to keep functioning as an educational facility, a number of works are required to repair, maintain and upgrade the existing facilities to meet the current and future needs of the school.

10.141 The equalities impact of the scheme has been duly considered in accordance with

the Council’s statutory duties under the Equality Act 2010. It is considered that there will be no adverse impacts of the scheme as the residential development will fund improvements to the school which will help to improve the quality of the educational facility. The application will not result in any decrease in the number of school places available or the number of pupils currently at the school. The development is therefore considered to be of substantial benefit to the needs of the proposed occupants who are part of the protected groups under the Equality Act 2010.

11.0 Conclusion The principle of development in the Green Belt is considered to be acceptable as the

very special circumstances are considered to outweigh any harm to the openness of the Green Belt. The enabling development and the impact this has on viability and planning obligations is acceptable. The design approach would not result in a detrimental impact on the visual amenities of the area, the openness of the Green Belt or the heritage assets. The development would not detrimentally impact on the listed building or locally listed buildings. There would be no adverse impact on the amenity of the neighbouring properties or the living conditions for the future occupants of the site. The car parking provision, access, landscaping and waste provision are acceptable. The scheme is in accordance with requirements for flood risk, biodiversity, drainage and sustainability. The development therefore complies with the following policies: National Planning Policy Framework (2012), Planning Practice Guidance (2014), Core Strategy (2013) policies CS4, CS12, CS13, CS14, CS16, CS17, CS21, CS22, CS25, Saved Local Plan (2003) policies, C1, C4, H8, D3, D20, D21, E3, E7, E8, E13, E16, E18, M2, M12, Parking Standards SPD, Planning and Design Guide SPD – Part D Guidelines for Development, Interim Technical Note Waste Storage Provision, Equality Act 2010, Biodiversity, Trees and Landscape SPD – Part B, Biodiversity, Trees and Landscape SPD – Part C, Affordable Housing SPD, Planning Obligations SPD – Part A and Planning Obligations SPD – Part B.

12.0 Recommendation 12.1 Grant planning permission subject to the following conditions and completion of S106

legal agreement. 12.2 Should the Section 106 legal agreement not be completed by 14th November 2014 it

is recommended that the Managers of Planning and Building Control be given delegated powers, if considered appropriate, to refuse the planning application for the reason set out below: Suitable provision for public open space, public leisure facilities, playing fields, greenways, cemeteries, museum and cultural facilities and section 106 monitoring has not been secured. Further, monies towards primary education, secondary

education, childcare, youth facilities, libraries and sustainable transport have also not been secured. The application therefore fails to adequately address the environmental works, infrastructure and community facility requirements arising as a consequence of the proposed form of development contrary to the requirements of policies R2, L5 and M2 of the Hertsmere Local Plan adopted 2003, Policy CS21 of the Core Strategy (2013), together with the Planning Obligations SPD Part A and Part B (2010) and the NPPF (2012).

13.0 Conditions 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 requirements of Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended).

2. Before first occupation of the approved development, all access and junction

arrangement serving the development shall be completed in accordance with the approved in principle plans (Drawing No.4) and constructed to the specification of the Highway Authority and Local Planning Authority’s satisfaction. Reason: To ensure that the access is constructed to the current Highway Authority’s specification as required by the Local Planning Authority and to comply with those policies of the development plan.

3. Construction of the development hereby approved shall not commence until a

Construction 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 details of: a. Construction vehicle numbers, type, routing; b. Traffic management requirements; c. Construction and storage compounds (including areas designated for car parking); d. Siting and details of wheel washing facilities; e. Cleaning of site entrances, site tracks and the adjacent public highway; g. Timing of construction activities to avoid school pick up/drop off times; h Provision of sufficient on-site parking prior to commencement of construction activities; i. Post construction restoration/reinstatement of the working areas and temporary access to the public highway. Reason: In order to protect highway safety and the amenity of other users of the public highway and rights of way.

4. NO DEVELOPMENT SHALL BE COMMENCED until the following has been

undertaken. a) A contaminated land assessment which shall include a desk-top study and site reconnaissance exercise (Phase 1) to establish whether the site is potentially contaminated and to produce a conceptual model of the site indicating sources of potential contamination and possible pathways to receptors of concern. b) If findings demonstrate it is necessary, a site investigation strategy shall be produced together with a timetable of works, which should be discussed with the

Environmental Health Department. The site investigation (Phase 2) shall consider relevant soil, soil gas, surface and groundwater sampling, in accordance with the quality assured sampling and analysis methodology of the Contaminated Land Reports as well as other appropriate guidance where necessary. This shall include risk assessment based on the Contaminated Land Exposure Assessment Model or where appropriate other guidance providing adequate justification can be provided for such use. The site investigation report shall detail all investigative works and sampling on site, together with the results of analysis, risk assessment to any receptors and a proposed remediation strategy. Any laboratories used for sampling shall be compliant with UKAS/MCERT or an equivalent approved accredited quality control system as appropriate c) The remediation work as outlined in the remediation strategy shall be carried out in full on site under a quality assurance scheme to demonstrate compliance with the proposed methodology and best practice guidance. d) Once remedial works have been completed a validation report must be submitted to the planning authority to demonstrate compliance with the approved remedial strategy. e) If during any works contamination is encountered which has not previously been identified, including new hotspots uncovered by demolition then the additional contamination shall be fully assessed and the remediation scheme amended. f) All works will be made available for witnessing by an appropriate Council Officer. Reason: To ensure the development does not give rise to unacceptable levels and types of pollution and to comply with Policy D17 of the Hertsmere Local Plan 2003.

5. No impact piling shall take place until a piling method statement (detailing the depth

and type of piling to be undertaken and the methodology by which such piling will be carried out, including measures to prevent and minimise the potential damage to subsurface sewerage infrastructure, and the programme for the works) has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority in consultation with Thames Water. Any piling must be undertaken in accordance with the terms of the approved piling method statement. Reason: The proposed works will be in close proximity to underground sewerage utility infrastructure. Piling has the potential to impact on local underground sewerage utility infrastructure.

6. NO DEVELOPMENT SHALL TAKE PLACE BEFORE a scheme for the on-site

storage and regulated discharge of surface water run-off has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved scheme. Reason: To ensure the proposed development does not overload the existing drainage system resulting in flooding and/or surcharging. To comply with Policy D3 of the Hertsmere Local Plan 2003 and Policy CS16 of the Hertsmere Core Strategy 2013.

7. NO DEVELOPMENT SHALL TAKE PLACE BEFORE a Drainage Impact Study, a

surface water drainage scheme for the site (based on sustainable drainage principles SuDS) 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 surface water scheme shall be implemented before the first occupation and/or use of the development and be constructed in accordance with the

approved details. Reason: To ensure that current flooding to property downstream of the development is not exacerbated. To comply with Policy D3 of the Hertsmere Local Plan 2003 and Policy CS16 of the Hertsmere Core Strategy 2013.

8. (a) All existing historic features shall be retained in situ, except where indicated

otherwise on the approved drawings, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. (b) None of the timbers forming the structural frame of the building(s) shall be cut, removed or otherwise altered, except where indicated otherwise on the approved drawings, unless otherwise agreed in writing by Local Planning Authority. (c) None of the lime plaster/lath and plaster finishes shall be removed, except where indicated otherwise on the approved drawings, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To safeguard the special architectural or historic interest, character, appearance and integrity of the Listed building. To comply with Policies E13 and E18 of the Hertsmere Local Plan 2003 and Policy CS14 of the Hertsmere Core Strategy 2013.

9. Except where indicated otherwise on the approved drawings or as required by any

condition(s) attached to this consent, all new external and internal works and finishes, works of making-good and dimensions and profiles of joinery, shall match the existing original adjacent work in respect of materials used, detailed execution and finished appearance. Reason: To safeguard the special architectural or historic interest, character, appearance and integrity of the Listed building. To comply with Policies E13 and E18 of the Hertsmere Local Plan 2003 and Policy CS14 of the Hertsmere Core Strategy 2013.

10. NO DEVELOPMENT SHALL TAKE PLACE BEFORE sample panels of brickwork

demonstrating the colour, texture, bond and pointing of the brickwork have been constructed on site. The Local Planning Authority shall approve in writing the colour, texture, bond and pointing of the brickwork prior to development commencing and the development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. The sample panel shall be retained on site until development is completed or removal is approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To safeguard the special architectural or historic interest, character, appearance and integrity of the Listed building. To comply with Policies E13 and E18 of the Hertsmere Local Plan 2003 and Policy CS14 of the Hertsmere Core Strategy 2013.

11. NO DEVELOPMENT SHALL TAKE PLACE BEFORE details of all internal

construction Works, the methods, materials and components to be used in the Works have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Works shall include (but are not limited to) structural strengthening, timber re-jointing, re-plastering, providing service routes and alteration, replacement or maintenance of architectural features. The development shall be completed in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To safeguard the special architectural or historic interest, character, appearance and integrity of the Listed building. To comply with Policies E13 and E18

of the Hertsmere Local Plan 2003 and Policy CS14 of the Hertsmere Core Strategy 2013.

12. NO DEVELOPMENT SHALL TAKE PLACE BEFORE details of all external

construction Works, the methods, materials and components to be used in the Works have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Works shall include (but are not limited to) alteration, replacement or maintenance of brickwork, bonding, mortar, roof materials, fenestration, rainwater goods and decorative features. The development shall be undertaken in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To safeguard the special architectural or historic interest, character, appearance and integrity of the Listed building. To comply with Policies E13 and E18 of the Hertsmere Local Plan 2003 and Policy CS14 of the Hertsmere Core Strategy 2013.

13. NO DEVELOPMENT SHALL TAKE PLACE BEFORE details of the position, height

and type of protective fencing for the archaeological site or monument have been submitted to, and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The fencing shall be erected as approved BEFORE ANY DEVELOPMENT TAKES PLACE and no works or storage shall take place within the fence, and the fence shall be retained in situ and be maintained until the development has been completed. Reason: To safeguard the special architectural or historic interest, character, appearance and integrity of the Listed building. To comply with Policies E13 and E18 of the Hertsmere Local Plan 2003 and Policy CS14 of the Hertsmere Core Strategy 2013.

14. NO DEMOLITION OR DEVELOPMENT SHALL TAKE PLACE BEFORE the

applicant, or his/her agent or successors in title, has secured the implementation of a programme of building recording and analysis or watching brief. Details are to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to demolition/development commencing. The recording/watching brief is to be undertaken throughout the course of works affecting the below ground deposits and historic fabric of the building(s) concerned. The recording/watching brief is to be carried out by a professional archaeological/building recording consultant or organisation in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To safeguard the special architectural or historic interest, character, appearance and integrity of the Listed building. To comply with Policies E13 and E18 of the Hertsmere Local Plan 2003 and Policy CS14 of the Hertsmere Core Strategy 2013.

15. PRIOR TO FIRST OCCUPATION of the hereby approved development, all agreed

works to the Grade II Listed Barn and Locally Listed Buildings, known as: Merry Hill House, Merry Hill Farmhouse and Hillbrow, will be completed. Reason: To safeguard the special architectural or historic interest, character, appearance and integrity of the Listed and Locally Listed Buildings. To comply with Policies E13 and E18 of the Hertsmere Local Plan 2003 and Policy CS14 of the Hertsmere Core Strategy 2013.

16. NO DEVELOPMENT (including any demolition, earthworks or vegetation clearance)

SHALL TAKE PLACE BEFORE a scheme of landscaping, phased in relation to any phasing of the development, which shall include details of both hard and soft landscape works and earthworks, has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. The scheme as approved shall be carried out in the first

planting season following the completion of each development phase. Any trees, shrubs or plants that die within a period of five years from the completion of each development phase, or are removed and/or become seriously damaged or diseased in that period, shall be replaced (and if necessary continue to be replaced) in the first available planting season with others of similar size and species, unless the Local Planning Authority gives prior written permission for any variation. Reason: To safeguard the setting of the Listed Barn and Locally Listed Buildings and to protect the openness of the Green Belt. To comply with Policies C1, C4, E13 and E18 of the Hertsmere Local Plan 2003 and Policies CS13 and CS14 of the Hertsmere Core Strategy 2013.

17. NO WORKS OR DEVELOPMENT SHALL TAKE PLACE BEFORE a scheme for the

protection of the existing trees (other than those the removal of which has been granted express permission in writing by the Local Planning Authority) has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Such a scheme will comply with the provisions of BS5837 and BS 3998. The approved scheme for the protection of the existing trees shall be implemented BEFORE DEVELOPMENT COMMENCES and be maintained in full until the development has been completed. Reason: To ensure protection during construction works of trees, hedges and hedgerows which are to be retained on or near the site in order to ensure that the character and amenity of the area are not impaired. To comply with Policies E7 and E8 of the Hertsmere Local Plan 2003 and Policies CS12 and CS22 of the Hertsmere Core Strategy 2013.

18. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted

Development) Order 1995 (or any Order revising, revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification), there shall be no enlargement or extension of the dwelling(s) hereby permitted, including any additions or alterations to the roof, without the prior written approval of the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To protect the openness of the Green Belt. To comply with Policies C1 and C4 of the Hertsmere Local Plan 2003 and Policies CS13 of the Hertsmere Core Strategy 2013.


Development) Order 1995 (or any Order revising, revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification), no new building or enclosure shall be constructed within the application site without the prior written approval of the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To safeguard the setting of the Listed Barn and Locally Listed Buildings and to protect the openness of the Green Belt. To comply with Policies C1, C4, E13 and E18 of the Hertsmere Local Plan 2003 and Policies CS13 and CS14 of the Hertsmere Core Strategy 2013.


Development) Order 1995 (or any Order revising, revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification), no new hardstanding for vehicles shall be constructed on, nor means of vehicular access to the highway be formed, laid out or constructed within the site without the prior written approval of the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To safeguard the setting of the Listed Barn and Locally Listed Buildings and to protect the openness of the Green Belt. To comply with Policies C1, C4, E13 and E18 of the Hertsmere Local Plan 2003 and Policies CS13 and CS14 of the

Hertsmere Core Strategy 2013. 21. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted

Development) Order 1995 (or any Order revising, revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification), no internal or external alterations shall take place to any garage, which would preclude its use for housing motor vehicles without the prior written approval of the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure that alterations are not carried out which would deplete the provision of car parking facilities within the site. To comply with Policies CS24 and CS25 of the Hertsmere Core Strategy 2013.


Development) Order 1995 (or any Order revising, revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification), there shall be no erection, construction or alteration of any gate, fence, wall or other means of enclosure without the prior written approval of the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To safeguard the setting of the Listed Barn and Locally Listed Buildings and to protect the openness of the Green Belt. To comply with Policies C1, C4, E13 and E18 of the Hertsmere Local Plan 2003 and Policies CS13 and CS14 of the Hertsmere Core Strategy 2013.


Development) Order 1995 (or any Order revising, revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification), there shall be no alterations to the windows and doors, hereby approved, without the prior written approval of the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To safeguard the setting of the Listed Barn and Locally Listed Buildings and to protect the openness of the Green Belt. To comply with Policies C1, C4, E13 and E18 of the Hertsmere Local Plan 2003 and Policies CS13 and CS14 of the Hertsmere Core Strategy 2013.

24. PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF DEVELOPMENT 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 by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved management plan. Reason: To ensure satisfactory landscape treatment of the site which will enhance the character and appearance of the site and the Green Belt area. To comply with Policies E7 and E8 of the Hertsmere Local Plan 2003 and Policies CS13 and CS22 of the Hertsmere Core Strategy 2013.

25. The application has been determined having regard for the following plans:

• Heritage Statement (Barn north of Merry Hill Farmhouse) – received 21st March 2014

• Heritage Statement – received 21st March 2014

• Transport Statement – received 21st March 2014

• Arboricultural Report and Tree Condition Survey - received 21st March 2014

• Sustainability Statement - received 21st March 2014

• Energy Demand Statement - received 21st March 2014

• Statement of Community Involvement - received 21st March 2014

• Design and Access Statement - received 21st March 2014

• Planning Statement - received 21st March 2014

• Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey and Protected Species Assessment -

received 24th March 2014

• Great Crested Newt Survey - received 24th March 2014

• Reptile Survey – received 24th March 2014

• Bat Survey Report - received 21st March 2014

• Bat Survey Report – received 24th March 2014

• Bat Inspection - received 24th March 2014

• Bat Surveys – received 24th March 2014

• Economic Viability Appraisal Report – received 8th May 2014

• Design Proposals – received 30th May 2014

• Flood Risk Assessment including Drainage Strategy – received 21st March 2014

• S101 Site Location Plan – received 21st March 2014

• S102 Existing Site Survey – received 21st March 2014

• S103 Plot 1 – Existing Plans and Elevations – received 21st March 2014



• S106 Plots 21-17 – Existing Plans – received 21st March 2014

• S107 Plots 21-17 – Existing Elevations – received 21st March 2014

• S108 Preparatory Classrooms – Existing – received 21st March 2014

• S109 Preparatory Department – Existing – received 21st March 2014

• SK136 – Demolished Buildings – received 23rd April 2014

• P101 Proposed Site Layout – Ground Level Revision C – received 22nd July 2014

• P102 Proposed Site Layout – Roof Level Revision C – received 22nd July 2014

• P103 Street Elevations Revision B – received 30th May 2014

• P104 Perspective Views Revision B – received 30th May 2014

• P107 Typical Details Revision A – received 30th May 2014

• P108 Aerial Perspective Revision B – received 30th May 2014

• P109 Plot 1 – Floor and Roof Plans Revision D – received 22nd July 2014

• P110 Plot 1 – Elevations Revision F – received 22nd July 2014

• P111 Plot 2 – Plans and Elevations Revision A – received 30th May 2014

• P112 Plot 3 – Plans and Elevations Revision A – received 30th May 2014

• P113 Plot 4 – Plans and Elevations Revision C – received 30th May 2014



• P116 Plot 7 – Plans and Elevations Revision D – received 30th May 2014

• P117 Plots 8-11 – Plans and 3D View Revision D – received 30th May 2014

• P118 Plots 8-11 – Elevations, Sections Revision C – received 30th May 2014

• P119 Plots 12-18 – Plans Revision F – received 2nd June 2014

• P120 Plots 12-18 – Elevations, Sections Revision C – received 30th May 2014


• P122 Plots 20, 21 – Plans and Elevations Revision C – received 30th May 2014

• Plots 123 Plots 22-26 – Plans and Elevations – received 30th May 2014

• P130 Bin Store – Plots 23-25 & 8-11 Revision A – received 30th May 2014

• P131 4 Bay Car Barn / Bin Store – Plots 12-18 Revision A – received 30th May 2014

• P132 Double Garage - Plot 1 – received 30th May 2014

• Accommodation Schedule – Floor Areas Revision K – received 18th June 2014

• Accommodation Schedule – Volumes Revision D – received 18th June 2014

• Accommodation Schedule – Footprints Revision C – received 18th June 2014

• L90-500B Landscape Strategy –received 24th March 2014

• L90-501 Landscape Key Plan – received 24th March 2014 Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning.

14.0 General Reason(s) for Granting Permission The principle of development in the Green Belt is considered to be acceptable as the

very special circumstances are considered to outweigh any harm to the openness of the Green Belt. The enabling development and the impact this has on viability and planning obligations is acceptable. The design approach would not result in a detrimental impact on the visual amenities of the area, the openness of the Green Belt or the heritage assets. The development would not detrimentally impact on the listed building or locally listed buildings. There would be no adverse impact on the amenity of the neighbouring properties or the living conditions for the future occupants of the site. The car parking provision, access, landscaping and waste provision are acceptable. The scheme is in accordance with requirements for flood risk, biodiversity, drainage and sustainability. The development therefore complies with the following policies: National Planning Policy Framework (2012), Planning Practice Guidance (2014), Core Strategy (2013) policies CS4, CS12, CS13, CS14, CS16, CS17, CS21, CS22, CS25, Saved Local Plan (2003) policies, C1, C4, H8, D3, D20, D21, E3, E7, E8, E13, E16, E18, M2, M12, Parking Standards SPD, Planning and Design Guide SPD – Part D Guidelines for Development, Interim Technical Note Waste Storage Provision, Equality Act 2010, Biodiversity, Trees and Landscape SPD – Part B, Biodiversity, Trees and Landscape SPD – Part C, Affordable Housing SPD, Planning Obligations SPD – Part A and Planning Obligations SPD – Part B.

15.0 Background Papers 15.1 The Planning application (14/0430/FUL) comprising application forms, certificate,

drawings and any letters from the applicant in support of the application. 15.2 Replies from Statutory consultees and correspondence from third parties. 15.3 Replies from Statutory consultees and correspondence from third parties. 15.4 Published policies / guidance. 16.0 Informatives 1. Policies

The application has been determined having regard for the following policies: National Planning Policy Framework National Planning Practice Guidance Core Strategy – CS4 Affordable Housing Core Strategy – CS12 The Enhancement of the natural environment Core Strategy – CS13 The Green Belt Core Strategy – CS14 Protection or enhancement of heritage assets Core Strategy – Policy CS16 Environmental impact of development Core Strategy – Policy CS17 Energy and CO2 Reductions Core Strategy – Policy CS21 Standard charges and other planning obligations Core Strategy – Policy CS22 Securing a high quality and accessible environment Core Strategy – Policy CS25 Accessibility and parking Local Plan – Policy C1 Green Belt

Local Plan – Policy C4 Development Criteria in the Green Belt Local Plan – Policy H8 Residential Development Standards Local Plan – Policy D3 Control of Development Drainage and Runoff Considerations Local Plan – D20 Supplementary Guidance Local Plan – Policy D21 Design and Setting of Development Local Plan – Policy E3 Species Protection Local Plan – Policy E7 Trees and Hedgerows – Protection and Retention Local Plan – Policy E8 Trees, Hedgerows and Development Local Plan – Policy E13 Listed Buildings – Alteration and Extensions Local Plan – Policy E16 Listed Buildings – Development Affecting the Setting of a Listed Building Local Plan – Policy E18 Buildings of Local Interest Local Plan – Policy M2 Development and Movement Local Plan – Policy M12 Highway Standards Parking Standards SPD Planning and Design Guide SPD – Part D Guidelines for Development Interim Technical Note Waste Storage Provision Equality Act 2010 Biodiversity, Trees and Landscape SPD – Part B Biodiversity, Trees and Landscape SPD – Part C Affordable Housing SPD Planning Obligations SPD – Part A Planning Obligations SPD – Part B

2. Positive and pro-active statement

Planning permission has been granted for this proposal. The Council acted pro-actively through positive engagement with the applicant during the pre-application process which led to improvements to the design of the new units, the layout, impact on the Green Belt and setting of the heritage assets, rearrangement of the parking areas and improvements to the wider highway network. Throughout the determination process negotiations with the applicant led to improvements to the conversion of the listed building and the impact of the development on the setting of the listed building. The Council has therefore acted pro-actively 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.

3. Building Regulations

To obtain advice regarding current Building Regulations or to submit an application, applicants should contact the Building Control Section Hertsmere Borough Council, Civic Offices, Elstree Way, Borehamwood, WD6 1WA, telephone 020 8207 2277. For more information regarding Building Regulations visit the Building Control Section of the Councils web site www.hertsmere.gov.uk - To obtain Building Regulations Approval the applicant should apply to obtain either: - Full Plans approval - this will give prior approval to the work or - Building Notice approval - this requires 48 hours' notice prior to the commencement of work. Both of these approvals will require the submission of the requisite fee and 2 copies of drawings and relevant calculations. Having applied for Building Regulations approval, the works applied for will be subject to inspection by Building Control Officers at specific stages to ensure compliance. The applicant has a statutory duty to inform the Council of any of the following stages of work for inspection: - Excavation for foundations - Damp proof course

- Concrete oversite - Insulation - Drains (when laid or tested) - Floor and Roof construction - Work relating to fire safety - Work affecting access and facilities for disabled people - Completion Any work that affects a party wall will require approval from the adjoining owner(s). This aspect of the work is a civil matter and does not come within the remit of the Council. Please refer to the Government's explanatory booklet The Party Wall etc. Act 1996, a copy of which is available from the Council Offices, Borehamwood, Hertfordshire. More information is available on the Council's web site or for further information visit the Department of Communities and Local Government website at www.communities.gov.uk.

4. National Grid

National Grid has identified that it has apparatus in the vicinity of your enquiry which may be affected by the activities specified. Due to the presence of National Grid apparatus in proximity to the specified area, the contractor should contact the National Grid before any works are carried out to ensure our apparatus is not affected by any of the proposed works.

5. Standard Drainage Criteria

1. MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE PEAK DISCHARGE (Qmax) The maximum allowable total discharge rate from this site will be calculated for the 'pre-developed' site layout for 1 in 1 year return period storm conditions. The contribution areas will be equivalent to 100% of the paved surface areas (roofs, hardstanding, roads etc) and an allowance of 10% of the 'permeable' surface areas (which will be deemed to act as though impermeable) 2. STORAGE REQUIREMENTS The need for storage will be calculated for the proposed site layout for 1 in 100 year return period critical storm duration conditions taking into account the maximum allowable discharge previously calculated. The contributory areas will allow for 100% of the impermeable surfaces plus an equivalent 10% of the permeable surfaces as though impermeable areas. 3. VOLUMETRIC RUNOFF COEFFICIENT The catchments within Hertsmere Borough will consist of heavy clay soil, therefore a volumetric coefficient of 0.9 will be used for calculations, when Micro Drainage or similar methodologies are used. In order to assist in a decision to advise the discharge of a planning drainage condition please supply 2 copies of drawings relating to the drainage layout, plus long sections and standard details (identifying any proposed storage and runoff control), along with calculations supporting the design and details of any flow restriction device. Please also include the pre and post development permeable and impermeable areas of the site in m2. If you require clarification on any aspect of the requirements of CG01 please contact

Hertsmere Borough Council Engineering Services on 020 8207 7492 or email [email protected] Notes: CG01 is a surface water source control condition and sets a maximum surface water discharge rate for a site based on a 1 in 1 year storm event for the pre development site. It also requires that storage be provided for a 1 in 100 year event, for the post development site, taking into account the previously calculated maximum discharge rate. This is a Hertsmere Borough Council improving condition and is over and above any requirements placed on the development by the Environment Agency and / or Thames Water Utilities. The developer has to design for the most onerous of any of the requirements regardless of whether the system ultimately discharges to a private drain, public sewer, soakaway or watercourse. Storage is to be provided on site by means of a storage tank or oversized pipes, not by utilising spare capacity within the system. The following information is required in order to determine compliance with CG01 and assist in recommending discharge of the condition:

1. Proposed maximum surface water discharge rate i.e. up to the maximum allowable as calculated using CG01.

2. Proposed method of limiting surface water discharge to this rate. 3. Proposed volume of storage as calculated using CG01. 4. Proposed method of providing this volume of storage. 5. The following 5 areas:

• The total site area.

• The pre development permeable area.

• The pre development impermeable area.

• The post development permeable area.

• The post development impermeable area. A site drainage plan showing layout, discharge point, location of storage and location of flow control device. This information is required so we can assess compliance with CG01 so without them we cannot recommend discharge of the condition. If you require clarification on any aspect of the requirements of CG01 please contact Hertsmere Borough Council Engineering Services on 020 8207 7492 or email [email protected]

6. UK Power Networks recommendations

UK Power Networks require 24 hour vehicular access to their substations. Consideration for this should be taken during the design stage of the development. The development may have a detrimental impact on our rights of access to and from the substation. If in any doubt please seek advice from our Operational Property and Consents team at Barton Road, Bury St Edmunds, Suffolk, IP32 7BG. No building materials should be left in a position where they might compromise the security of the substation or could be used as climbing aids to get over the substation surround.

There are underground cables on the site associated with the substation and these run in close proximity to the proposed development. Prior to commencement of work accurate records should be obtained from our Plan Provision Department at UK Power Networks, Fore Hamlet, Ipswich, IP3 8AA. All works should be undertaken with due regard to Health and Safety Guidance notes HS(G)47 Avoiding Danger from Underground services. This document is available from local HSE offices. Should any diversion works be necessary as a result of the development then enquiries should be made to our Customer Connections department. This address is UK Power Networks, Metropolitan House, Darkes Lane, Potters Bar, Herts, EN6 1AG.

7. Bats

Works should proceed with caution, particularly those involving the roofs, and in the event of bats or evidence of them being found, work must stop immediately and advice taken on how to proceed lawfully from one of the following: a bat consultant, the UK Bat Helpline: 0845 130 0228, Natural England: 0845 601 4523, or the Herts & Middlesex Bat Group website: www.hmbg.org.uk.

8. Birds

In the event of an active birds’ nest being found, work must stop immediately and professional, ecological advice taken on how best to proceed.

9. Great Crested Newts

In the event of Great Crested Newts being found, work must stop immediately and ecological advice taken on how to proceed lawfully from a newt consultant or Natural England: 0845 601 4523.

10. Secure by Design

• I will be looking for all doors, be they front, side or back, to be tested to PAS24-2012 standards.

• It would be ideal if all letter boxes could be external and not through doors, which could improve thermal efficiency.

• All ground floor windows to have been tested to PAS24-2012.

• Ideally I would be looking for external utility meters or meters that can be read remotely so as to try and reduce distraction burglaries.

• Where there is an integral garage to the house and an internal door then the door must have a British Standard locking system i.e. BS3621 and the like, the alternative would be an LPS1175 SR1 tested garage door.

• The flats to have access control utilising either LPS1175 SR2 or STS202 BR2 door sets and also have audio visual connections to each individual flat.

• There is no indication of lighting and I would rather not have bollards as they do have a tendency to be hit by vehicles as they are out of the driver’s sight line. Bollards also do not provide an adequate colour rendition so as to be able to identify the true colours of say vehicles. I know lighting will be a problem in the area but will be looking for lighting poles. A Lux plan will be needed in due course.

• I am generally happy with the boundary treatment but am not sure what the boundary treatment for the whole site will be. I would ask that any fencing between Plots be brought up level to the building line so as not present an area where a potential thief can hide

• There is an indication on some plans of fenced off land behind the garages attached to Plot 18 and as this will lead in to the rear garden of the Unit, where we know the majority of burglary entries take place, could the fencing be clarified.

• There are a number of gates on the site and on the 1.8 metre gates I will be looking for a Sold Secure Silver Standard hasp and padlock at the top and bottom of the gate. It is a little more difficult to secure 1.2 metre gates but I would be looking for a hasp and padlock.

11. Waste

With regard to surface water drainage it is the responsibility of a developer to make proper provision for drainage to ground, water courses or a suitable sewer. In respect of surface water it is recommended that the applicant should ensure that storm flows are attenuated or regulated into the receiving public network through on or off site storage. When it is proposed to connect to a combined at the final manhole nearest the boundary. Connections are not permitted for the removal of ground water. Where the developer proposed to discharge to a public sewer, prior approval from Thames Water Developer Services will be required. They can be contacted on 0845 850 2777. Legal changes under The Water Industry (Scheme for the adoption of private sewers) Regulations 2011 mean that the sections of pipes you share with your neighbours, or are situated outside of your property boundary which connect to a public sewer are likely to have transferred to Thames Water’s ownership. Should your proposed building work fall within 3 metres of these pipes we recommend you contact Thames Water to discuss their status in more detail and to determine if a building over / near to agreement is required. You can contact Thames Water on 0845 850 2777 or for more information please visit our website at www.thameswater.co.uk Where a developer proposes to discharge groundwater into a public sewer, a groundwater discharge permit will be required. Groundwater discharges typically result from construction site dewatering, deep excavations, basement infiltration, borehole installation, testing and site remediation. Groundwater permit enquiries should be directed to Thames Water’s Risk Management Team by telephoning 020 8507 4890 or by emailing [email protected]. Application forms should be completed online via www.thameswater.co.uk/wastewaterquality. Any discharge made without a permit is deemed illegal and may result in prosecution under the provisions of the Water Industry Act 1991. Thames Water would recommend that petrol/oil interceptors be fitted in all car parking/ washing/repair facilities. Failure to enforce the effective use of petrol/oil interceptors could result in oil-polluted discharges entering local watercourses.

12. Water

With regard to water supply, this comes within the area covered by the Affinity Water Company. For your information the address to write to is – Veolia Water Company The Hub, Tamblin Way, Hatfield, AL10 9EZ or tel. 0845 782 3333

Case Officer Details

Rebecca Dolphin - Email [email protected]

application no: date of application: 21 march … · date of application: 21 march 2014 statutory...

Documents