Part I – Release to Press

Meeting: Planning and Development Committee

Agenda Item:

Date: 5 March 2013

Author: Dave Rusling 01438 242270

3 Lead Officer: Viv Evans 01438 242257

Contact Officer: Dave Rusling 01438 242270

Application Nos : 12/00577/FPM and 12/00608/CAC

Location : 3, 4, 5 and 6 Ditchmore Lane, Stevenage

Proposals :

12/00577/FPM

12/00608/CAC

Refurbishment of Nos. 3, 4 and 5 to provide 2no five bed dwellings and 1no one bed flat; erection of 4no two bed and 1no three bed bungalows; extension to No. 6 to provide homeless hostel for The Haven; change of use of No. 4 from office to residential; associated access, car parking and landscaping.

Demolition of existing outbuildings and extensions to the rear of 4, 5 and 6 Ditchmore Lane

Drawing Nos.: 12005wd2.01, 02, 03, 04A, 10A, 11A, 12A, 13A, 14, 15, 20, 21, 22, 23, 30, 31 P1, 40, 41, 42A, 43A, 44A, 50, 51 and landscape plan.

Applicant : North Herts Homes Ltd

Date Valid: 4 December 2012 and 21 December 2012

Recommendations : GRANT PLANNING PERMISSION

GRANT CONSERVATION AREA CONSENT

- 2 -

Plan for illustrative purposes only

1. SITE DESCRIPTION 1.1 The application site comprises Nos. 3, 4, 5 and 6 Ditchmore Lane including their rear

curtilages. These properties are attractive, unlisted, but nevertheless historic buildings located within the southern end of the Old Town Conservation Area. Nos. 3 and 4 are a pair of semi detached properties constructed of red facing brickwork under a brown plain tiled roof. Although currently vacant, these properties were previously used as a residential property (No.3) and as a community mental health premises operated by Hertfordshire NHS foundation trust (No.4). Numbers 5 and 6 are both detached properties. No.5 is constructed of red brickwork under a slate roof and is currently occupied by Stevenage Haven and provides accommodation for the homeless. The final property is No.6 Ditchmore Lane which is constructed of yellow brickwork under a slate roof and is currently vacant, having previously been occupied as a veterinary centre. These properties are located on the western side of Ditchmore Lane, which at its southern end becomes a dead end, having been truncated by Fairlands Way, but providing access to offices, Stevenage Cricket Club and the service area of Majestic Wine, located beyond the application site. Each of the properties has their own vehicular and pedestrian access which is taken via Ditchmore Lane.

1.2 The land is adjoined by a four-storey office block (Saffron Ground) to the south and by the

Gate Hotel to the north, a two storey property facing onto Ditchmore Lane, with a modern three storey red brick element to the rear which has frontages onto Gates Way and Lytton Way. To the west the site backs onto Lytton Way, which is located at a lower level than the application site, separated by grassed bank. A number of trees are sited at the top of this bank but outside of the application site. Finally, to the east separated by Ditchmore Lane, is the Stevenage Cricket Club, beyond which is the King George V playing field. Within the application site there are a number of mature trees.

- 3 -

2. RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY 2.1 There is no relevant history pertaining to No.3 Ditchmore Lane. 2.2 Permission granted under ref 2/0107/98 in May 1998 for change of use of 4 Ditchmore

Lane from hostel for the homeless to community resource centre for mental well being. 2.3 Permission granted under ref 02/00094/FP in July 2002 for change of use of No.5

Ditchmore Lane from dwelling house to night shelter for the homeless and ground floor rear extension.

2.4 Permission granted under ref 04/00472/FP in November 2004 for retention of a rear

conservatory at 5 Ditchmore Lane. 2.5 Permission granted under ref 2/0334/91 in February 1992 at 6 Ditchmore Lane for two

storey rear extension and ground floor rear extension for residential and veterinary surgery use and car parking spaces.

2.6 Permission granted under ref 07/00138/FP in June 2008 at 6 Ditchmore Lane for change of

use and sub-division of existing veterinary surgery into 2no two bed flats and erection of three storey building to accommodate 4no one bed and 5no two bed flats, with associated car parking and refuse storage. This permission was never implemented and has now lapsed.

3. THE CURRENT APPLICATION 3.1 The proposal seeks planning permission for the refurbishment and redevelopment of Nos.

3, 4, 5 and 6 Ditchmore Lane. The submitted plans identify that Nos.3 and 4 would be refurbished, with primarily internal alterations and the replacement of fenestration, retaining No.3 as a residential property. This would remain as a 5 bedroom property. No.4 would be converted into a 5 bed residential property. The changes to facilitate this property are primarily internal with minor changes to the fenestration and the removal of a rear canopy. Both of these properties would be served by 10m depth private rear gardens and continue to be accessed from Ditchmore Lane retaining parking facilities at the front.

3.2 No.5 would be refurbished and there would be internal alterations and the erection of a

single storey rear extension which would replace an existing rear extension and conservatory. This new extension would project 0.5m beyond the existing rear wall of the building, some 1.5m beyond the rear wall of the existing conservatory. The extension would have a flat roof design with the rear elevation being glazed. This building would be used as office and training purposes for the Haven on the ground floor, with additional staff accommodation on the first floor, with the remainder of the first floor providing a self contained 1 bed flat. The main changes to the building are internal with the exception of new fenestration primarily in the south elevation. An enclosed rear garden area would be retained to serve this building. The existing vehicular access between No. 4 and 5 would be altered to become a pedestrian access and parking for two cars would be provided to the front of the property, accessed from an improved access between Nos. 5 and 6.

3.3 No.6 would be refurbished by way of internal alterations and the demolition of a part single

storey, part 2 storey rear extension. It is proposed to extend this refurbished property by way of a two storey glazed rear link which would be attached to a new three storey flat roofed extension incorporating a 4 storey enclosed rear staircase. This would be of a contemporary design and would project westwards toward the rear of the site close to the southern boundary where it adjoins the office development at Saffron Ground. This building would become a new Stevenage Haven incorporating reception/office facilities at ground

- 4 -

floor in the existing No.6 with the first floor providing 3 bedrooms and a staff bedroom. A new glazed flat roof link would join the existing No.6 and the new three storey addition reaching a maximum height of 6m.

3.4 The three storey addition would contain stairs immediately adjoining the link and would

provide communal accommodation at ground floor in the form of a large lounge, kitchen, bathroom and toilet facilities, including a laundry room and plant room. There would also be a TV room and storage facilities. At first floor level there would be 18 en-suite bedrooms, with a further 18 en-suite bedrooms within the second floor. To the west of the building would be a 4 storey fire escape. This extension would extend 38m to the rear of No.6 incorporating the two stair areas. The three storey element would be designed with a flat roof having a maximum height of 9m. The rear stair area would have a maximum height of 11m. The building has an average width of 14m. It has been designed in order to provide articulation by breaking up the appearance of the main north and south elevations. The building follows a modern design approach and is proposed to be constructed from a mixture of brickwork and render, having a flat, sedum planted roof.

3.5 To the rear of Nos. 3, 4, 5 and 6 it is proposed to redevelop the garden of No. 3 and the

rear areas of 4, 5 and 6 to provide 5no. two and three bed bungalows arranged in an ’L’ shape, with two 2 bed bungalows in a semi detached arrangement to the rear of Nos. 3 and 4 and a detached 3 bed bungalow to the west of these located toward the boundary of the site with Lytton Way. To the south of this would be another semi-detached pair of 2 bedroom bungalows sited to the rear of Nos. 4 and 5 Ditchmore Lane. The bungalows would have a height of 2m to the eaves, rising to 5.2m to the ridge and are to be constructed out of a mixture of brickwork and render with grey roof tiles. Access to Nos. 4 and 5 and to the parking area to serve the extended and altered No.6 and the bungalows would be via an improved and widened access which currently serves No.6. This shared surface area is also identified as providing the necessary turning facilities required by refuse vehicles. A pedestrian access would be provided between Nos.4 and 5 which would provide access to the bungalows and their associated parking facilities with two spaces being provided to the front of No.5. It is also proposed to provide communal parking in the rear area to serve staff and visitors to No.6.

3.6 A two storey outbuilding to the rear of No.6 is proposed to be demolished in order to

facilitate the new access. Similarly, a number of sheds and outbuildings are proposed to be demolished along with an extension to No.5 to accommodate the development. These buildings are the subject of a separate application for Conservation Area Consent. The layout plan identifies the loss of a number of trees, but seeks to retain some of the more important specimens within the site and along the western boundary with Lytton Way. The existing retaining walls along the frontage of the site are for the most part indicated to be retained. Bin storage and secure cycle facilities are proposed to be sited to the rear of the extended No.6

3.7 In terms of car parking, a total of 26 car parking spaces are proposed to serve the

development. These a dispersed throughout the development with 3 each to serve Nos.3 and 4 Ditchmore Lane, located at the front of these dwellings. Ten spaces are proposed to serve the Haven building with 2 of these located at the front of No.5 and the other 8 to the rear of the new extension to No.6. Each of the bungalows is provided with 2 parking spaces.

4. PUBLIC REPRESENTATIONS 4.1 Both the planning application and conservation area consent application have been

publicised by way of site notices, press notices and letters to the occupiers of adjoining premises. In response letters have been received from planning consultants acting on

- 5 -

behalf of the owners of Saffron Ground, planning consultants acting on behalf of the owners of The Gate Hotel, Stevenage Cricket Club, Stevenage Cricket and Hockey Sports Club, part owner of Maxet House Business Park, Ditchmore Lane and the occupiers of 1 Ditchmore Lane,168, 172A, High Street, 18 The Brambles, 4 Rectory Lane, 8C Letchmore Road, 4 Ashcroft, Primett Road, 19, Trinity Place, 15 Lyndale, 2 Victoria Close, 14 Hutton Close, Luton and 62 Stokenchurch Place, Bradwell Common Milton Keynes making the following comments on the applications:-

1. Consider the application to be invalid as a number of documents are missing

including, a Statement of Community Involvement, Transport Assessment, Historic Statement, full bat survey, affordable housing statement and sunlight daylight/sunlight assessment.

2. Consider the Ecology report to be incomplete as it would appear that no internal

inspections of the buildings have been undertaken. Consider that any decision could be open to challenge on grounds of failure to properly engage with the Habitats Directive, Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010, Countryside Rights of Way Act 2000 and the Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006. The proposal would result in a loss of biodiversity caused by the development and reduce the habitat for nesting birds and roosts for Bats.

3. The description of the development does little to inform interested parties of the

nature or scale of the proposed development.

4. The application comprises garden land and is not previously developed and seeks to develop green field land ahead of previously developed sites.

5. Loss of most of the trees on site either directly or indirectly, to be replaced by

buildings and hardsurfacing which causes substantial harm to the appearance of the Conservation Area. The proposal would erode the special character recognised in the Council’s Character Assessment.

6. The proposal conflicts with the advice in the NPPF which seeks to preserve the

heritage asset as the proposal would fail to preserve this open space and green lung which has a positive role to play in creating sustainable communities and a sense of place. The introduction of the hostel block and bungalows would fail to reflect the pattern and grain of the conservation area.

7. The proposal may generate in the order of 150 vehicle movements per day. The

narrow access to the site and Ditchmore Lane are unable to cope with the volume of traffic proposed by the development, which would conflict with pedestrian flows along this road. The application should not be allowed to proceed without evidence in the form of a Traffic Assessment and draft travel plan.

8. Concern about the scale of the proposed three/four storey extension to No.6 and its relationship to the host building. The new extension will dominate the existing building which would diminish unacceptably the role and appearance of the building within the Conservation Area. The scale of the extension is inappropriate when compared with the proposed bungalows.

9. The proposal will result in the loss of existing gates and piers to the front of No’s 5 and 6 buildings, caused by the widening of the access. This and the introduction of additional hard standings to the front of the existing buildings to accommodate parked vehicles would erode the garden setting of the properties to the detriment of the character and appearance of the area.

- 6 -

10. The site is unsuitable for development and the amenities of the future occupiers of the dwellings would be adversely affected by noise and car fumes. Furthermore, those trees that are proposed to be retained will dominate the gardens of the new dwellings. This will result in rear gardens cast in shadow and future pressure to remove the remaining trees. The privacy of the occupants would be impinged by reason of overlooking from the Gate Hotel.

11. Fear of crime from the new development. The existing Haven although a much

smaller scale has brought a host of social problems to the area affecting residents, passers by and the Police.

12. There is no need for the new facilities. Other facilities hostels have been closed

which have generated the current need. Even if there is a need, this does not outweigh the permanent harm the development would cause to the Conservation Area unless there is no alternative site for such a use.

13. Question why so many homeless people should be accommodated on one very

large site rather than dispersing them throughout the town. 14 Unclear how the Council can reconcile this development with its Community Safety

Partnership Plan 2011-2014. 15. Overdevelopment of the plot by providing high density development that is not

compatible withy the existing pattern of development. An inadequacy of amenity space and landscaping would be provided to serve the development.

16. No evidence has been presented that any consideration has been given to the

potential adverse impact of the development on the Stevenage Cricket and Hockey Sports Club being located immediately to the east of the proposed development.

17. The regular turn over of occupants due to the short duration of licences indicates

that the residents will have no medium or long term reliance on the facility and little sense of belonging to the to the surrounding area.

18. The Council have confirmed that the Haven will accommodate people who are not

necessarily from Stevenage. Surely, Stevenage should be responsible for accommodating people from Stevenage as opposed to taking individuals from other towns

19. No reason to for the demolition of these buildings, save to make way for the entirely

inappropriate and unacceptable homeless shelter. 20. This is an inappropriate location for a homeless shelter. 21. The development will have a negative impact on the local community, private

residence and business alike. 22. Will the development not be bad to the value of neighbouring properties? 23. Lack of transparency and underhanded way that the application has been

submitted. The local residents should have been consulted much more fully throughout the feasibility and planning stage.

4.2 The occupier of 45 Fieldfare has written supporting the development of more houses for the

homeless, but caveats this by urging the houses fronting onto Ditchmore Lane are left in situ and that the old town needs to be carefully preserved.

- 7 -

5. CONSULTATIONS

5.1 Hertfordshire County Council - Highways 5.1.1 Comments that Ditchmore Lane is classified as a local access road subject to a speed limit

of 30mph. The site is conveniently placed for accessing Bus Route 10. It is a circular service linking Stevenage Town Centre, rail station with Stevenage Old Town. Operation is day time only Monday to Saturday and does not extend into the peak periods. Stevenage rail station also falls within the 800 metre accessibility criteria where suburban/intercity services may be accessed. Stevenage Town Centre is located around 500 metres from the site with reasonable pedestrian accessibility where further bus/coach services may be accessed.

5.1.2 The proposal incorporates alterations/refurbishment/extension to existing dwellings to

provide up to 8 additional dwellings. A planning condition has been accordingly recommended for a residential travel plan. Overall, the highway implications from the development onto the public highway are considered to be not significant. Considers the proposals to be acceptable subject to the imposition of planning conditions.

5.2 Police Architectural Liaison Officer

5.2.1 Confirms that he has received a Secured by Design application from the architects on behalf of North Herts Homes and it is their intention to achieve full SBD accreditation for this site in order to “ensure the highest standards of security for the residents”. Having initially raised concerns in respect of the type lighting to serve the development, this aspect has subsequently been amended and now meets with his requirements.

5.2.2 Concern is raised from both the PALO and neighbourhood officers that this development could become a crime generator due to the nature of the service users of the Haven. This could pose a crime risk to the residents of the bungalows and the houses. This area does have a history of antisocial behaviour, drugs issues and criminal damage/arson. Because of this he would recommend that the bin store and cycle area be suitably secured. The current Haven does have CCTV and he recommends the developer should look to extend this to the new development and possibly the area outside the bungalows. If the latter is not possible he would ask that any lighting columns are capable of having mobile CCTV cameras fitted retrospectively.

5.2.3 Finally, concludes that it is not the intention of the Police Design Service to oppose this development but they do have concerns about certain aspects of it and will be working with the architects and developers to ensure that it is built to a safe and secure standard, should it be granted full planning permission.

5.3 BEAMS (Council’s Conservation Advisor)

5.3.1 The site lies within the Stevenage Old Town Conservation Area, at its southern end (within Character Area 3). This southern part of the conservation area (south of Gates Way) comprises Victorian housing and differs greatly in character from the rest of the Conservation Area. The properties within the site; 3, 4, 5 and 6 Ditchmore Lane are all highlighted within the Stevenage Old Town Conservation Area Appraisal as buildings of local importance. To the north of the site are 1 and 2 Ditchmore Lane, these are also buildings of local importance and form part of the Gate Hotel (to the rear is The Gate Hotel, a late 20th century brick building). Directly to the south of the site (and outside the Conservation Area boundary) lies Saffron Ground, a large four storey brick office building which in no way enhances the setting of the Conservation Area. These Victorian semi-detached and detached villas, 1 to 6 Ditchmore Lane form an attractive group and provide

- 8 -

much of the prevailing character of the locality. Nos 3 & 4, 5 and 6 have retained their long rear gardens which extend back to Lytton Way and boundary walls and outbuildings (some of which may be contemporary with the houses).

5.3.2 The Stevenage Old Town Conservation Area Management Plan (July 2012) highlights the

site as one which could be sensitively developed (subject to retention of the frontage buildings) and from a conservation viewpoint it is agreed that there is scope for appropriate development at the rear of the site. Under the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) the Conservation Area is considered to be a heritage asset, and the buildings of local importance (3 & 4, 5 and 6 Ditchmore Lane) are non-designated heritage assets.

5.3.3 Paragraph 131 of the NPPF requires account to be taken of the desirability of sustaining

and enhancing the significance of heritage assets (in this case the Old Town Conservation Area) and the desirability of new development making a positive contribution to local character and distinctiveness. When considering the impact of a proposed development on the significance of a designated heritage asset, great weight should be given to the assets conservation. Paragraph 134 of the NPPF states that where a development would lead to less than substantial harm to the significance of a designated heritage asset, this harm should be weighed against the public benefits of the proposal. The NPPF (para 128) states local planning authorities should require an applicant to describe the significance of any heritage assets affected; this has not been done in sufficient detail within the Design and Access Statement, particularly in relation to the impact upon the conservation area.

5.3.4 The existing buildings are mostly vacant, No 6 has been empty for several years now and is

in a poor state of repair – it is important these properties are kept in use and occupied so that they can be properly maintained. The retention, repair and re-use of these non-designated heritage assets is a positive aspect of this scheme however the deteriorated state of the assets should not be taken into account in any decision (NPPF, para. 130). Unfortunately the proposed development will entail loss of a number of trees within the site; these presently form an attractive backdrop to this group of Victorian houses – their loss will be somewhat detrimental to the character/appearance of the Conservation Area, although I note other trees will be planted within the site.

 5.3.5 Regarding the proposed new development to the rear of these houses, the comments

mainly focus on the ‘extension’ to No. 6 to create a homeless hostel for The Haven. A flat-roofed, brick (mix of red / buff brick) and cream-rendered building is proposed, joined to No.6 with a glazed link. Whilst it is accepted that a pastiche of the existing Victorian housing is not appropriate and a modern approach is perhaps sensible, have concerns about the form, massing and flat roof of the proposed building. At pre-application stage it was advised that the massing should be reduced and the flat roof reconsidered; as a result of this the elevations were broken up/staggered and varying parapet heights introduced. The change in materials is an improvement. An assessment of the revised materials has been undertaken.

5.3.6 Consider that the new building will be a visible element within the Conservation Area

despite being to the rear of No. 6 due to the views available of the southern end of the site from the access drive to Saffron Ground. Even with the use of buff brickwork remains concerned that the east elevation will make an uncomfortable backdrop to No. 6 and the staggered length of the south elevation with its cream rendered panels will not sit comfortably in relation to its surroundings. Concern is raised that this elevation, located hard-up against the south boundary of the site, will dominate the south boundary of the Conservation Area and make an unfortunate introduction to the southern end of the Old Town Conservation Area. Considers that the new building will be rather overbearing in relationship to the bungalows to the rear of 3, 4 and 5 and the rear outlook of the frontage houses themselves (all of a domestic nature).

- 9 -

5.3.7. The recommendation of BEAMS is to refuse this application, largely based upon the detrimental impact the rear extension to No. 6 Ditchmore Road will have on the character and appearance of the Stevenage Old Town Conservation Area. Considers the proposal to be contrary to Stevenage Local Plan Policy EN1 which states: ‘new developments’ will only be permitted in conservation areas if proposals are sympathetic to the design, scale, siting, form and materials of the adjacent properties and with the character and appearance of the area’. The NPPF (para 132) states that ‘any harm … to a heritage asset should require clear and convincing justification’; whilst there is clearly some public benefit in the repair and retention of the frontage properties and the provision of a homeless hostel on balance believes that the harm to the Conservation Area is too great to outweigh this and would like to see the design of the new rear block given further consideration.

5.3.8 It is also recommend that Conservation Area Consent for demolition of outbuildings etc is

also refused as consent for demolition should only be granted if the demolition and its replacement development positively contribute to the character and appearance of the conservation area.

5.4 Council’s Arboricultural Officer 5.4.1 No objection but has suggested that the Sycamore proposed to be removed to the rear of

No.4 (T21 in the tree survey submitted with the application) be retained and has commented on the possible impact of the access road on the roots of tree T37 and the possible impact of the wall proposed to the rear of No.5 and the impact on the roots of trees T22, T23 and T37.

5.5 Hertfordshire County Council – Property Services

5.5.1 In accordance with HCC’s Planning Obligations Toolkit are seeking financial contributions toward Primary, Secondary and Nursery Education, Childcare, Youth facilities and Libraries. They are also seeking the provision of fire hydrants within the development.

5.6 Environmental Health

5.6.1 Raise no objection subject to the imposition of conditions to deal with noise mitigation.

5.7 Herts and Middlesex Wildlife Trust (HMWT)

5.7.1 The application relates to refurbishment and redevelopment of the existing developed site. The site contains a reasonable number of trees, many of which will need to be removed to enable the redevelopment. The accompanying arboricultural report shows the trees are mostly category C with some category B specimens.

5.7.2 The application is supported by a Phase 1 Habitats and Protected Species Scoping Survey

(MKA Ecology, Dec 2012). This shows that the site comprises scattered broad leaf and conifer trees, dense scrub, amenity grassland, introduced shrub, species poor hedgerow, buildings, bare ground and hard standing. The report confirms that the habitats on site have potential to support nesting birds (protected species) and some of the buildings show potential to support bats. Overall, the habitats are deemed of low ecological interest, so there is no significant constraint to the development. However, the consultant puts forward precautionary recommendations in respect of nesting birds and also bats, and also recommendations for improving biodiversity value of the site. These are:-

Clearance of trees and vegetation should be carried out September to February to

avoid bird nesting season. If clearance must be done during nesting season (February to August inclusive), an inspection must first be done by a suitably experienced ecologist. If nesting activity is confirmed, no work to the area concerned may proceed until the young are confirmed to have fledged.

- 10 -

Further bat surveys must be done, including building inspection, tree inspection and three bat emergence and activity surveys (May to August only), to confirm whether or not bats are roosting on the site and how they may be impacted by the proposed development. Bat mitigation and licences may be required, based on the results of the surveys.

Biodiversity enhancements to benefit protected species found on site, Native species used within landscaping scheme, Retain dead wood resulting from tree felling on the site, to create log piles.

These recommendations are supported by the Trust, and should be incorporated into suitable conditions. These are incorporated in the overall recommendation at Section 10.

5.7.3 HMWT note that the landscaping plan retains some of the existing trees and varied new

planting is included. The specification is for native species only. This is welcomed and should help improve the site for wildlife. Further to this, HMWT recommends that more habitat diversity is created in the landscaping where possible, through creation of dead wood habitats and wildlife ponds, for instance. Features can also be incorporated into new and refurbished buildings to create roosting and nesting opportunities for bats and birds (e.g. bird nest boxes, bat roost boxes/bricks/tubes etc).

5.8 Herts County Council - Archaeology

5.8.1. Raise no objection subject to the imposition of conditions to cover:- The archaeological recording of the structures subject to development/demolition in their

present form before development commences. The archaeological monitoring and recording of the development/demolition of the standing

structures including soft stripping any grubbing out of foundations etc. An archaeological field evaluation of the site before any development commences and such

appropriate mitigation measures indicated as necessary by that evaluation. 5.9 Herts County Council – Fire Officer

5.9.1 Access for a fire appliance appears to satisfy the requirements of the building regulations. Recommend that a fire hydrant should be provided within 90m of an entrance to a premises and that consideration should be given to providing a sprinkler system to the dwellings.

6. RELEVANT PLANNING POLICIES

6.1 In the determination of planning applications development must be in accordance with the statutory development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise.

For Stevenage the statutory development plan comprises:

Hertfordshire Waste Local Plan 1999 Hertfordshire Minerals Local Plan 1998 The Stevenage District Plan Second Review 2004.

The former Draft Core Strategy and Development Management Policies were withdrawn on

1st February 2012. However, the Site Specific Policies Plan, the Old Town Area Action Plan and the Gunnels Wood Area Action Plan have all been approved locally by the Council’s Executive as material considerations in the determination of planning applications and continue to be used for Development Management purposes. Additionally, the Council’s

- 11 -

Interim Planning Policy Statement adopted in April 2012 is a material consideration in the determination of planning applications registered on or after the 18 April 2012.

6.2 Where a Development Plan Document has been submitted for examination but no

representations have been made in respect of relevant policies, then considerable weight may be attached to those policies because of the strong possibility that they will be adopted. The converse may apply if there have been representations which oppose the policy. However, much will depend on the nature of those representations and whether there are representations in support of particular policies.

6.3 In considering the policy implications of any development proposal the Local Planning

Authority will assess each case on its individual merits. However, where there may be a conflict between policies in the existing Development Plan and policies in any emerging Development Plan Document the adopted Development Plan policies currently continue to have greater weight.

6.4 Central Government Advice 6.4.1 In March 2012 the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) was published and in doing

so it replaced many documents including all Planning Policy Guidance Notes and Planning Policy Statements. The NPPF sets out the Government’s planning policies for England and how these are expected to be applied. Annex 1 of the NPPF provides guidance of how existing local plan policies which have been prepared prior to the publication of the NPPF should be treated. Paragraph 214 states that for 12 months from the day of publication, decision-takers may continue to give full weight to relevant policies adopted since 2004 even if there is a limited degree of conflict with this Framework. However, this only applies if the development plan has been adopted in accordance with the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004. Whilst the District Plan Second Review was adopted in December 2004 it is not in accordance with The Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004. Accordingly the advice at paragraph 215 of the NPPF applies which states that only due weight should be afforded to the relevant policies in the adopted local plan according to their degree of consistency with this framework.

6.4.2 Planning law requires that applications for planning permission must be determined in

accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. The NPPF is itself a material consideration. Given that due weight can only be given to relevant policies in the local plan depending on their degree of consistency with the NPPF, it will be necessary, in the determination of this application, to assess the weight given to the relevant local plan policies The overriding aim of the NPPF is the presumption in favour of sustainable development.

6.5 Adopted District Plan Policy TW1 - Sustainable Development Policy TW8 - Environmental Safeguards Policy TW9 - Quality in Design Policy TW11 - Planning Requirements Policy H7 - Assessment of Windfall Housing Sites Policy H8 - Density of Residential Development Policy H14 - Benefits of Affordability Policy T6 - Design Standards Policy T12 - Bus Provision Policy T13 - Cycleways Policy T14 - Pedestrians Policy T15 - Car Parking Strategy Policy EN9 - Archaeology and Development Policy EN13 - Trees in New Developments

- 12 -

Policy EN27 - Noise Pollution Policy EN29 - Light Pollution Policy L15 - Outdoor Sports Provision in Residential Developments Policy L16 - Children’s Play Space Provision in Residential Developments 6.6 Supplementary Planning Guidance/Documents Parking Provision Supplementary Planning Guidance adopted January 2012. Stevenage Design Guide – October 2009. Old Town Conservation Area Management Plan – July 2012 6.7 Interim Planning Policy Statement for Stevenage (IPPS) IP01 Sustainable Development Principles IP02 Planning Requirements IP06 Housing Mix IP08 Affordable Housing Thresholds IP09 Affordable Housing Tenure, Mix and Design

7. APPRAISAL 7.1 The main issues for consideration with the application for planning permission are the

acceptability of the proposal in land use policy terms; compliance with housing policies; impact upon the character and appearance of the area; impact upon the amenities of neighbouring properties; suitability of the residential environment, impact on the highway network and car parking provision. For the application for Conservation Area Consent the main issues for consideration are the impact of the demolition of the outbuildings and extensions upon the character and appearance of the Old Town Conservation Area.

Planning Application Ref 12/00577/FPM 7.2 Land Use Policy Considerations 7.2.1 The planning application seeks the refurbishment of existing properties Nos. 3-6 Ditchmore

Lane, retaining one as a residential unit and returning another to residential use. It is then proposed to redevelop the rear area of all of the properties for housing, including affordable housing and a homeless Hostel, retaining some as private gardens to serve the frontage properties. As the site is not allocated for residential development within the District Plan Second Review 1991 – 2011 it is regarded as a ‘windfall site’. The proposed development must, therefore, be considered having regard to Policy H7 relating to windfall residential sites. In accordance with this policy, planning permission will only be granted where the site is on land classified as previously-developed or a small underused urban site and that development of the site would not lead to the loss of structural open space as defined in policy TW2 or community facilities in relation to policy TW3. Additionally, any proposal should have no detrimental effect on the environment and surrounding or adjoining properties; there should be access to local facilities and include opportunities to access alternative forms of travel to private motorised transport.

7.2.2 For the purpose of clarity, the definition of previously-developed land, as stated within the

NPPF, is ”that which is or was occupied by a permanent structure including the curtilage of the developed land and any associated fixed surface infrastructure”. The definition of previously developed land excludes private residential gardens. By this definition, No.3 is classed as a residential property. However, the remainder of the properties and their gardens are/were in non-residential use. Given that only a small portion of the site comprises the private garden of No.3, a property which has been vacant since 2008 and is surrounded by other commercial properties, it is considered that the proposal comprises the redevelopment of a primarily previously developed, brownfield land.

- 13 -

7.2.3 Policy TW2 of the District Plan relates to the structural open spaces that exist throughout

the town. In this instance, the site is located in a well-established mixed use area and does not impact on any structural open space in the immediate locality. Policy TW3 of the Adopted Plan states that proposals will not be permitted which involve the loss of neighbourhood facilities, except where it is proven that there is no need for the facility in its existing use or any other social, community, education or leisure use. The proposed development would not result in the loss of any neighbourhood facilities.

7.2.4 In accordance with Policy H7, residential developments of windfall sites must have a good

level of access to local facilities. In this instance, the site is within easy walking distance of Stevenage Town Centre being located only 25m from the pedestrian bridge linking Ditchmore Lane with the Tesco Superstore at the northern end of the town centre. Added to this, the site is very close to the Old Town and the facilities contained therein. Access to the site by non-car modes of transport is also an important consideration in respect of windfall residential sites. The application site enjoys very good links to pedestrian and cycle routes and is within a short walking distance of the town’s bus and rail stations. In view of the aforementioned, it is considered that the site accords with the advice in policy H7 of the adopted local plan. Furthermore, it fully accords with the advice in the NPPF as it provides a highly sustainable form of development, would bring vacant properties back into use and would provide a mix of housing to cater for different groups in the community.

7.2.5 Setting aside the impact of the proposed development on the character of the area and the

amenities of the neighbouring residents, the proposed development complies with Policy H7 of the adopted local plan. Accordingly, it is considered that the proposal is acceptable in land use policy terms. The impact upon the environment of the area and neighbouring properties will be addressed later in this report.

7.3 Compliance with the Council’s Housing Policies 7.3.1 As well as the adopted local plan, it is also necessary to consider the emerging policy

position. Policy IP08 of the IPPS sets out affordable housing thresholds. Setting aside the hostel, which is not classed as a dwelling, this policy requires provision based on the number of homes provided. The proposal provides 5 bungalows and the provision of 1 additional open market dwelling (No.3 Ditchmore Lane is already in residential use, albeit vacant) along with other non residential accommodation. The Council’s requirement for this scheme, excluding the Hostel would be 20% provision. Whilst it could be argued that the Hostel fulfils the applicant’s requirement toward affordable housing, the applicant has indicated that the 5 bungalows would be made available for social rent. Given this, the scheme meets with the requirements of the IPPS and the provision of the required affordable housing in perpetuity can be secured by way of a S106 legal agreement.

7.3.2 In addition to the affordable housing contribution, financial contributions are also required in

accordance with the Hertfordshire County Council tool kit and contributions to Stevenage Borough Council for financial payments towards the improvement of nearby outdoor sports facilities and the children’s play facilities. These benefits will be secured by a S106 legal agreement, which the developer has expressed a willingness to enter into.

7.3.3 As well as being in accordance with Development Plan policy, the proposal is also therefore

considered to be in accordance with emerging planning policy and would also contribute toward the Council’s five-year supply of housing.

7.4 Character and Appearance of the Area.

7.4.1 In terms of the character and appearance of the area, the site lies at the southern end of the Old Town Conservation Area. The Conservation Area Management Plan (CAMP) for this part of the Old Town conservation Area identifies one of the strengths being No’s 1 to 6

- 14 -

Ditchmore Lane which are considered as being structures of importance and which have retained a number of their original features. However, it also identifies the boarded up appearance of No.6 as a weakness. The CAMP also makes reference to the application site and states that development on the site could make more efficient use of these low density plots given their highly sustainable location. However, it also states that the need to retain the original buildings in an appropriate setting should form an essential part of any future scheme.

7.4.2 The proposed development comprises single storey bungalows set behind the frontage

buildings which would be retained. These would be sited 6m from the rear boundary of the site. It also proposes a three storey Hostel building projecting east-west to the rear of No.6, with the rear elevation located approximately 17m from the rear of the site. The roofs of the bungalows would be visible from Lytton Way to the west of the site, as would the new Hostel building. From Ditchmore Lane the bungalows would for the most part be screened by the existing buildings at No’s 1-6. However, the Hostel addition would be visible in both a southerly and northerly direction. The character of the area is of mixed development, comprising commercial and residential properties of varying styles and heights. The hostel building would be set behind the rear of No.6, which is two and a half storeys in height. To the south is the significantly higher modern red brick office building, saffron Ground. On the opposite side of Lytton Way is the Icon building. To the north is the Gate Hotel the rear element of which is a modern red brick three storey building. Consequently, whilst the site lies within the Old Town Conservation Area, there is no particular pattern or style of development that predominates.

7.4.3 Paragraph 131 of the NPPF requires account to be taken of the desirability of sustaining

and enhancing the significance of heritage assets and the desirability of new development making a positive contribution to local character and distinctiveness. When considering the impact of a proposed development on the significance of a designated heritage asset, great weight should be given to the asset’s conservation. Paragraph 134 of the NPPF states that where a development would lead to less than substantial harm to the significance of a designated heritage asset, this harm should be weighed against the public benefits of the proposal.

7.4.4 It is noted that BEAMS (the Council’s conservation advisors) have recommended that the

application be refused for the reasons set out at paragraph 5.3 above. Whilst they are supportive of the refurbishment of the existing properties fronting onto Ditchmore Lane and have raised no objection to the bungalows, they are concerned about the impact that the new Hostel building will have on the appearance of the Conservation Area. Despite this element of the scheme being located to the rear of No.6 they are concerned about the views afforded of the southern end of the site from the access drive to Saffron Ground. Furthermore, even with the use of buff brickwork to accompany cream render and the introduction of bays offering articulation in the northern elevation of the building, BEAMS’ concern remains that the east elevation will make an uncomfortable backdrop to No.6 and the staggered length of the south elevation with its cream rendered panels will not sit comfortably in relation to its surroundings. Concern is also raised that this elevation, located hard-up against the south boundary of the site, will dominate the south boundary of the Conservation Area. BEAMS are also critical of the flat roof design. Finally, they raise concern about the loss of trees within the site.

7.4.5 Whilst these concerns are acknowledged and understood, a balance has to be made

between the impact that the Hostel extension would have upon the appearance of the Conservation Area and the other benefits of the development in terms of the enhancement of the frontage buildings, the provision of new homeless accommodation and affordable housing for which there is a clear need. The refurbishment of Nos.3-6 Ditchmore Lane would accord with the advice in the NPPF as it would sustain and enhance the significance of heritage assets by putting the existing vacant buildings fronting Ditchmore Lane to a viable use, consistent with their conservation by bringing them into residential and a

- 15 -

replacement commercial use. The applicant has clarified that the new Hostel has been designed in a contemporary style specifically using a flat, sedum roof in order to provide a modern appearance rather than to create a pastiche of the existing buildings. Additionally, a green, flat roof will increase the biodiversity of the site which a pitched roof would not. Furthermore, the roof design will reduce surface run-off from the site. Given the differing styles and heights of buildings in this part of the Old Town Conservation Area, the fact the existing frontage buildings would be retained and the new building would be set against the southern boundary of the site against the adjoining four storey office building, it is considered that the development when taken as a whole would have the benefit of sustaining and enhancing the heritage asset.

7.4.6 To conclude on this issue, whilst the concerns of BEAMS and a number of third party

objections to the scheme which refer to the negative impact of the proposals on the Conservation Area, primarily as a result of the Hostel building are noted, it is considered that the proposal as a whole would be acceptable in terms of its design and appearance.

7.5 Impact upon the Amenities of Neighbouring Properties

7.5.1 As set out in Section 4 above, objections have been received from a number of people including representations on behalf of the owners of The Gate Hotel, Saffron Ground and Stevenage Cricket Club. These latter three properties are the ones most directly affected by the built form of the development being either adjacent to the site or opposite it.

7.5.2 With regard to the Gate Hotel, this lies to the north of the application site and has a

detached element fronting Ditchmore Lane which is in line with No.3 Ditchmore Lane. To the rear of this is a further element which is three storeys in height, detached from the front building and runs east west along the rear of the of the hotel site. This element has a frontage onto Gates Way, but also has an elevation containing bedroom windows in the first and second floors facing toward No.3 Ditchmore Lane, which already overlook the rear garden area of No.3. There is a single storey element between this elevation and the application site itself. The current proposal identifies three new bungalows sited to the rear of No.3: a pair of semi-detached dwellings and a detached unit. The semi-detached properties have their rear elevations facing toward the boundary with the hotel and would be sited between 4.2 and 6m from the boundary and 15m from the elevation of the hotel containing the bedroom windows. Given this relationship and the fact that the bungalows would be single storey in height, it is not considered that there will be any adverse impact upon the occupants of the hotel. Similarly, the detached bungalow has a flank wall facing toward the hotel which would contain only a bathroom window in it. As a result of this arrangement, it is similarly considered that there would be no adverse impact on the hotel. It is proposed to erect a 1.8m high close boarded fence along the boundary between the application site and the hotel.

7.5.3 Turning to the office development of Saffron Ground, the three storey extension to No.6

Ditchmore Lane would run east west long the southern boundary of the site and would be located between 1m and 2m from the boundary. The two sites are separated by a 1.8m high brick wall, beyond which is the access road serving the office car park. The offices are between two and three storeys in height and have a primarily brick flank elevation facing the application site, with some fenestration in this elevation, primarily serving stair areas. The proposed Hostel building would contain windows at ground floor level serving 2 habitable rooms with the remainder being non-habitable. At the first and second floors there would be windows serving bedrooms. The elevation of the new Hostel would be sited approximately 10m away from the office building. Given this degree of separation and the configuration of the room it is not considered that the proposed development would adversely affect the operating conditions of the offices.

- 16 -

7.5.4 Finally, in respect of the Cricket Club, the new buildings would be sited behind the existing buildings fronting onto Ditchmore Lane. Given this and the separation distance involved, it is not considered that the development would harm the amenities of the operators.

7.5.5 Having regard to the above, it is considered that the development of the site can be

accommodated without adversely affecting the amenities of the occupiers of properties adjoining the site. A number of objections have been raised in respect of anti-social and potentially criminal behaviour. However, as set out in paragraph 5.2 above, although the Police Architectural Liaison Officer has commented on this, he is not objecting to the application and will be working with the architects and developers to ensure that it is built to a safe and secure standard. Matters of anti-social behaviour is not something the can be controlled by the planning legislation but is a management issue for the operators of the development.

7.6 Suitability of Proposed Residential Environment

7.6.1 With regard to the level of amenity for the future occupiers of the proposed dwellings, all of the properties would be provided with private garden areas which meet with the Council’s adopted standards and a private amenity area is proposed for the new Hostel. In addition to this, the site is within easy walking distance of King George V Playing Fields. All of the proposed dwellings would enjoy adequate levels of daylight and sunlight. Comments have been made in respect of the proximity of the proposed bungalows to existing trees close to the western boundary of the site. Three bungalows face toward this boundary. There are no existing trees that would impact upon the detached bungalow proposed to the rear of No.3. With regard to the pair of bungalows to the rear of No.5, there are trees along the boundary to the rear of these premises which will have some impact on the sunlight and daylight received particularly in the afternoon. However, given the quality of these trees and the fact that they have been neglected for a number of years and would benefit from sympathetic pruning, it is not considered that a refusal of permission on loss of light could be sustained. Lastly, appropriate mitigation is proposed to ensure that the gardens of the properties and bedrooms would not suffer from traffic noise.

7.6.2 On the basis of the above, it is considered that the occupants of the development would be

afforded an acceptable residential environment in which to live which would be located in a highly sustainable location with easy access to facilities in both the Old Town and Stevenage Town Centre and good access to public transport facilities.

7.7 Highway Implications 7.7.1 In assessing the application Hertfordshire County Council (HCC) as highway authority have

considered the impact of the proposed development upon the local highway network. Although the objectors have suggested that the application ought to have been accompanied by a transport statement, HCC have advised that a development of this nature falls below the threshold for either a transport assessment or a transport statement.

7.7.2 As set out earlier, the proposal incorporates alterations/refurbishment/extensions to existing

dwellings and other properties to provide up to 8 additional dwellings and a homeless hostel. Based on this, HCC have advised that the highway implications from the development onto the public highway are considered not to be significant. Ditchmore Lane is classified as a local access road, subject to a speed limit of 30mph. A swept path analysis has been submitted within the application which has demonstrated that refuse vehicles and fire appliances are able to adequately access and egress the site. In terms of sustainability, the site is conveniently placed for accessing bus services linking Stevenage Town Centre, rail station with Stevenage Old Town and falls within the 800 metre accessibility criteria where suburban/intercity services may be accessed. Stevenage Town Centre lies in close proximity to the site (within 500m) and within reasonable pedestrian accessibility, where further bus/coach services may be accessed.

- 17 -

7.7.3 Having regard to the above, HCC as highway authority are raising no objection to the

proposal, subject to the imposition of conditions to deal with access, turning facilities construction of the development and the need for a residential transport plan. Accordingly, the proposal is acceptable in highway terms.

7.8 Car parking

7.8.1 The application proposes that a total of 16 spaces would be provided to serve the dwellings and 10 spaces for the Haven building. The Council’s standards as set out in the Parking Provision Supplementary Planning Document adopted January 2012, require 1 space per 1 bed unit, 1.5 spaces per 2 bed unit, 2 spaces per 3 bed unit and 2.5 spaces per 4+ bed unit. In terms of the Haven building, the most relevant standard is that which applies to hostels, which in terms of small hostels (single parent or couples with no children) requires 3 spaces per 4 units.

7.8.2 Based on the proposed type of dwellings (2 x 5 bed houses, 4 x 2 bed bungalows and 1 x 3

bed bungalow) 13 spaces would be required. However, as the site is in a highly sustainable location (zone 1) the requirement can be reduced to between 25% and 50% below the minimum. Consequently, between 4 and 7 spaces would be required. With regard to the Haven, this would require 30 spaces based on the number of bedrooms (40), however, as this is also in zone 1 this can be reduced to between 0-25% of the maximum, giving a range of between 0 and 8 spaces. Having regard to the above and the highly sustainable location, the provision of 26 spaces would exceed the Council’s adopted standards.

7.8.3 In terms of cycling provision 13 spaces are proposed to serve the Haven, which also meets

with the Council’s adopted standards. 7.8.4 The proposal is, therefore, acceptable in terms of car parking provision. 7.9 Trees and Ecology 7.9.1 The proposal involves the loss of a number of existing trees and landscaping at the site and

the provision of additional landscaping to augment the new development. As part of the application, an Arboricultural Impact Assessment was submitted by the applicant identifying those trees to be retained and those to be removed. In response to this, and on behalf of the owners of the Gate Hotel, a further tree report and Arboricultural Impact Assessment has been submitted by a different Arboricultural Consultant. There is disagreement between the two reports, with the areas of difference relating to the quality of the trees, their health, the implications of the retained trees on the living environment of future occupants and the suitability of the proposed replacement planting.

7.9.2 Having regard to the above the Council’s Arboriculturist has been consulted on the

application and has assessed the reports and visited the site as well as providing advice at pre-application stage. Whilst it is noted that a number of trees will need to be removed, it is considered that the most important specimens will be retained particularly those immediately to the rear of Nos 4 and 5. Additionally, following pre-application advice additional trees are identified to be retained which were previously intended for removal. As set out in section 5.4 the Council’s Arboriculturist is generally content with the proposal subject to concerns about the removal of one tree and the impact of the development on the Root Protection Zone (RPZ) of 3 others. In response to these comments, the applicant has confirmed that Tree 21 will now be retained and have amended the rear boundary treatment to No.5 to ensure the means of enclosure does not impact on the root protection zone of trees T22, T23 and T37. With regard to the impact of the access road this is outside of the Root Protection Zone of tree T37. Amended plans have been provided identifying these changes.

- 18 -

7.9.3 Whilst it is accepted that the loss of a number of trees will impact upon the appearance of the site, some of the most significant specimens will be retained and will be augmented by additional planting’ the details of which can be secured by the imposition of a planning condition. Consequently, with these amendments to the landscaping, to be retained supplemented and enhanced by new planting, the proposal is considered to be acceptable.

7.9.4 An ecology report has been submitted with the application which has identified the

likelihood of bats being present at the site. A Phase 1 habitat survey was undertaken which identified that a dead Oak tree and a number of other trees within the site contain a number of features with the potential to support roosting bats, as do a number of the buildings. Additionally, a number of recordings of bats have been identified within a 2km radius of the site, including Common Pipistrelle and Brown Long-Eared Bats. The presence of Bats at the site has also been noted by the Arboricultural Consultant acting on behalf of the Gate Hotel when the site was visited in September 2009. These were in the in the vicinity of the trees to the rear of Nos.1 and 2 Ditchmore Lane and The Haven. The ecology report recommends that further surveys be undertaken including an internal inspection of the buildings and trees to search for roosting bats. It also suggests a number of mitigation measures.

7.9.5 The LPA has a duty to comply with the requirements of Regulation 9(5) of the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010. In particular, the LPA must ‘have regard to the requirement of the Habitats Directive so far as they may be affected by [the decision whether to grant planning permission]’. Under the regulations it is an offence to deliberately disturb wild animals of any European protected species, or to damage or destroy a breeding site or resting place of any such an animal of such a species. The development could, therefore, be likely to offend Article 12 of the Habitats Directive, by amounting to a disturbance in accordance with the Article.

7.9.6 However, planning permission could still be granted unless the development would be unlikely to be licensed by Natural England. In order to assess the likelihood of a licence being granted it is necessary for a Local Planning Authority to be satisfied that the development meets three tests, known as derogation powers. The three tests under the derogation powers are:

1. the development should be permitted for imperative reasons of overriding public

interest of a social or economic nature 2. there must be no satisfactory alternative, and 3. favourable conservation status of the European Protected Species in their natural range must be maintained

7.9.7 With regards to test 1, the relevant question here is: is there an imperative reason of overriding public importance? For the reason to be ‘imperative’ there must be a high degree of ‘need’ for the action concerned. Clearly, the development of a new homeless shelter and affordable housing is an important function that needs to be fulfilled and the provision of this facility would do that. Over recent years Stevenage Haven has had to refuse an average of over 500 referrals per annum, due to a lack of available bed spaces within the Hostel. During 2010 and 2011 the annual combined average of refused referrals was 590. The current hostel can accommodate a maximum of 18 single homeless people, (14 men and 4 women in dormitories). It is, therefore, reasonable to conclude that this development is required for an imperative reason of overriding public interest of a social or economic nature.

7.9.8 With regards to test 2, there are two aspects to this. Firstly, could the development on site

be carried out in such a way to avoid the disturbance to the habitat? The majority of the buildings capable of accommodating bats are proposed to be retained (roof areas of 3, 4 and 5 Ditchmore Lane). The only suitable access to the site is between Nos.5 and 6

- 19 -

Ditchmore Lane, therefore, the two storey outbuilding to the rear of No.6 would need to be removed to facilitate access to this site.

7.9.9 Secondly, could the development be provided on an alternative site? The choice of the

Haven Ditchmore Lane was identified as being the most suitable site as it is owned by the Council and the applicant. Added to this, the site is close to many amenities and services and is within walking distance of a health centre, the bus and railway station and shops located within both the old and the new town. The current Hostel has been on the same site for 10 years and there are considered to be no other sites that would offer the quantity or quality of positive advantages and benefits that are contained within this proposal, as detailed above. Finally and most importantly, this site is primarily vacant and, therefore, in terms of deliverability, the proposed facility can be provided in a reasonably short time scale.

7.9.10 With regards to 3, this test will be met provided that specified mitigation measures are implemented. The proposed development site has been surveyed and may have the potential for supporting Bats. The ecologist report proposes further surveys be undertaken and to provide biodiversity enhancement to benefit Bats and biodiversity enhancements to benefit any other protected species found on site and to use native species within any landscaping scheme. This aspect of the development has been assessed by the Herts and Middlesex Wildlife Trust who accept that overall the habitats at the site are of low ecological interest and are raising no objection to the proposal but support the imposition of conditions in order to secure biodiversity improvements.

7.9.11 It can, therefore, be concluded that there is no evidence to indicate that the tests will not be met and that the development would not be licensed and that with appropriate mitigation the proposal would accord with the advice in the NPPF.

7.9.12 With regard to birds at the site, it is noted that the loss of trees will have an impact upon

nesting birds. However, it is proposed that existing nesting boxes be retained post development and the installation of new ones. Also, the applicant is aware of the need to refrain from tree felling during the nesting season unless the trees have first been inspected by a suitably qualified ornithologist. Herts and Middlesex Wildlife Trust have considered the impact of the proposal on birds and are raising no objection subject to the imposition of a condition covering the above.

7.10 Other matters

7.10.1 The application has been considered by Hertfordshire County Council with regards to any archaeological importance. They have advised that there is a likelihood of the site supporting archaeology and are, therefore, recommending the imposition of conditions to deal with recording of any structures in their present form before development commences and any necessary monitoring and mitigation if necessary. With regard noise, a report dealing with this aspect of the development has been submitted as part of the planning application. This has been assessed by the Council’s Environmental Health Section who are satisfied with the findings subject to the imposition of conditions to cover the need for acoustic fencing along the western boundary to safeguard the development from traffic noise and the need for mechanical ventilation to achieve a “good” standard in bedrooms of the new dwellings. Finally, with regard to Air Quality, the Environmental Health Section have confirmed that there are no issues of air quality which would affect the development.

Conservation Area Consent ref 12/00608/CAC 7.11 The application for Conservation Area Consent seeks the demolition of a number of

unattractive outbuildings sheds and the demolition of a rear extension attached to No.4. None of these structures are considered to sustain or enhance the character of the Conservation and are for the most part not publicly visible. However, the existing two storey

- 20 -

outbuilding located to the rear of No.6a, although being attractive in appearance is set back from Ditchmore Lane and only the flank elevation is readily visible. On this basis, its demolition is not considered to harm the appearance of the Conservation Area.

8. CONCLUSIONS 8.1 The proposed residential redevelopment of the site complies with the National Planning

Policy Framework and both the current Development Plan policy and the Interim Planning Policy Statement. It is considered that the proposal would have an acceptable impact on the character and appearance of the area and the Old Town Conservation Area within which the site lies. It would not harm the amenity of neighbouring land users. Additionally, the proposed scheme would not adversely affect the operation or safety of the local highway network and would provide a sufficient level of car parking. The proposal would mitigate against any disturbance to protected species which may be residing at the site. Finally, issues relating to archaeology, noise, trees, affordable housing and developer contributions can be satisfactorily addressed through the use of conditions or a S106 legal agreement. Accordingly, it is recommended that both planning permission and Conservation Area Consent be granted.

9. RECOMMENDATIONS 9.1 That planning permission ref 12/00577/FPM be GRANTED subject to the applicant having

first entered into and completed a S106 legal agreement to secure/provide financial contributions towards:-

the provision of 20% affordable housing;

primary education, secondary education, childcare provision, youth services and library services to serve the development;

the provision of fire hydrants;

a financial contribution toward the improvement of outdoor sports provision; and

a financial contribution towards children’s play facilities

The detail of which would be delegated to the Head of Planning, Regeneration and Transport in liaison with the Head of Legal Services and subject to the following conditions:-

1 The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in general accordance with the following approved plans: 12005wd2.01, 02, 03, 04A, 10A, 11A, 12A, 13A, 14, 15, 20, 21, 22, 23, 30, 31 P1, 40, 41, 42A, 43A, 44A, 50, 51 and landscape plan..

REASON:- For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning 2. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three 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 by Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004).

3. No development shall take place until a schedule and samples of the materials to be used

in the construction of the external surfaces of the development hereby permitted have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details

REASON:- To ensure the development has an acceptable appearance in accordance with policy TW9 of the Stevenage District Plan Second Review 1991-2011.

- 21 -

4. No development shall take place until there has been submitted to and approved by the

Local Planning Authority a scheme of soft and hard landscaping and details of the treatment of all hard surfaces. The scheme shall include details of all existing trees and hedgerows on the land and details showing all trees to be removed, or retained, together with details of all new planting to take place including species, size and method of planting.

REASON:- To ensure a satisfactory appearance for the development in accordance with policy TW9 of the Stevenage District Plan Second Review 1991-2011.

5. All planting, seeding or turfing comprised in the approved details of landscaping shall be

carried out in the first planting and seeding seasons following the first occupation of the building(s) or the completion of the development whichever is the sooner.

REASON:- To ensure the proper completion of the soft landscaping in the interests of visual amenity in accordance with policy TW9 of the Stevenage District Plan Second Review 1991-2011.

6. All hard surfacing comprised in the approved details of landscaping shall be carried out

within three months of the first occupation of the building(s) or the completion of the development, whichever is the sooner.

REASON:- To ensure the proper completion of the hard landscaping in the interests of visual amenity in accordance with policy TW9 of the Stevenage District Plan Second Review 1991-2011.

7. No tree shown retained on the approved plans, or subsequently approved landscaping

scheme, shall be cut down, uprooted or destroyed, nor shall any retained tree be topped or lopped within five years of the completion of development without the written approval of the Local Planning Authority.

REASON:-To ensure the protection of those trees which should be retained in the interests of visual amenity in accordance with policy EN13 of the Stevenage District Plan Second Review 1991-2011.

8. Before any development commences, including any site clearance or demolition works, any

trees on the site shall be protected by fencing or other means of enclosure in accordance with a detailed scheme submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Such protection as may be agreed shall be inspected and approved by the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of the work and maintained until the conclusion of all site and building operations.

REASON:-To ensure that the retained tree(s) are not damaged or otherwise adversely affected during site operations in accordance with policy EN13 of the Stevenage District Plan Second Review 1991-2011.

9. Any trees or plants comprised within the scheme of landscaping, which within a period of

five years from the completion of the development die, are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced in the next planting season with others of similar size and species, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

REASON:- To ensure the maintenance of the approved landscaping scheme in the interests of visual amenity in accordance with policy TW9 of the Stevenage District Plan Second Review 1991-2011.

10. Notwithstanding the details shown in this application the treatment of all boundaries

including details of any walls, fences, acoustic fencing, gates or other means of enclosure shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of development. The approved boundary treatments shall be completed before the use hereby permitted is commenced or before the buildings are occupied and thereafter permanently retained.

REASON:- To ensure a satisfactory standard of development in the interests of amenity in accordance with policy TW9 of the Stevenage District Plan Second Review 1991-2011.

- 22 -

11. Prior to the first occupation of the dwellings or the Hostel hereby permitted the parking

spaces and turning facilities identified on drawing 12005wd2.10A shall be constructed, hardsurfaced and made ready for use to serve the occupants of those properties unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The spaces shall be permanently retained in that form thereafter.

REASON:- To ensure that adequate new and replacement parking and servicing facilities are available within the site and that there is no detriment to the safety of adjoining highways in accordance with policy T15 of the Stevenage District Plan Second Review 1991-2011.

12. The development hereby permitted shall not be occupied until the access, as shown in

principle on drawing No. 12005wd2.10A has been designed in detail and constructed to the satisfaction of the Local Highway Authority.

REASON:-To ensure the access is constructed to the current Highway Authority's specification in accordance with policy T6 of the Stevenage District Plan Second Review 1991-2011.

13. All areas for parking, delivery and storage areas associated with the construction of the

development, including the access works must be provided on land which is not public highway and the use of such areas must not interfere with the use of the public highway.

REASON:-In the interests of highway safety, amenity and free and safe flow of traffic in accordance with the advice contained in the National Planning policy Framework.

14 Before work commences on site the method for wheel washing of vehicles exiting the site

shall be approved by the Local Planning Authority and used until development is completed. REASON: In the interests of highway safety and to maintain the amenity of the local area in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework March 2012.

15 The cycle parking facilities identified on drawing 12005wd2.10A shall be provided prior to

the first occupation of the dwellings or the Hostel hereby permitted and shall be permanently retained at the site.

REASON:- To promote the use of sustainable transport modes and reduce reliance on the private car in accordance with Government advice contained in the National Planning Policy Framework.

16. Prior to the commencement of development the applicant shall provide a Residential Travel

Plan with the object of reducing residents travelling to the development by private car which shall first have been submitted to and approved in writing by Local Planning Authority.

REASON: To promote sustainable transport measures for residents in accordance with the advice contained in Nation Planning Policy Framework.

17. No demolition or construction work relating to this permission shall be carried out on any

Sunday, Public or Bank Holiday nor at any other time, except between the hours of 0800 and 1800 on Mondays to Fridays and between the hours of 0900 and 1300 on Saturdays.

REASON:- To safeguard the amenities of the occupiers of neighbouring properties in accordance with policy EN27 of the Stevenage District Plan Second Review 1991-2011. 18. No development shall take place until a scheme for protecting the proposed residential

units from external noise from adjoining traffic either with widows open or with mechanical ventilation where windows are closed, to achieve the ‘good’ standard in the bedrooms in accordance with BS:8233 has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall thereafter be implemented in accordance with the approved details.

- 23 -

REASON:- To ensure that residents of the development do not suffer undue noise disturbance from traffic on the adjoining highways in accordance with policy EN27 of the Stevenage District Plan Second Review 1991-2011.

19 No demolition/development shall take place/commence until an Archaeological Written

Scheme of Investigation has been submitted to and approved by the local planning authority in writing. The scheme shall include an assessment of archaeological significance and research questions; and: 1. The programme and methodology of site investigation and recording 2. The programme for post investigation assessment 3. Provision to be made for analysis of the site investigation and recording 4. Provision to be made for publication and dissemination of the analysis and records of

the site investigation 5. Provision to be made for archive deposition of the analysis and records of the site

investigation 6. Nomination of a competent person or persons/organisation to undertake the works set

out within the Archaeological Written Scheme of Investigation.

The demolition/development shall take place/commence in accordance with the programme of archaeological works set out in the Written Scheme of Investigation set out above.

The development shall not be occupied until the site investigation and post investigation assessment has been completed in accordance with the programme set out in the Written Scheme of Investigation approved above and the provision made for analysis and publication where appropriate. REASON: - To ensure that the proposal makes provision for the suitable recording of the existing structures on site in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework March 2012.

20 No demolition of buildings, or removal of trees, scrub or hedges, shall be carried out on site between the 1st March and 31st August inclusive in any year, unless searched beforehand by a suitably qualified ornithologist.

REASON: It is an offence under Part I, section 1(1) of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) to damage or destroy the nest of any wild bird whilst that nest is in use or being built.

21 No demolition or other work to existing buildings or felling of mature trees, is to take place

until a bat survey report and mitigation scheme has been submitted to the Local Planning Authority for approval in writing. This is to include the results of full surveys for bats complying with best practice guidelines (Bat Conservation Trust, 2012). If bats are present, a Method Statement (as for European Protected Species mitigation licence) including Mitigation Strategy and Works Schedule must be submitted, stating how it is proposed to accommodate each species of bat within the new development.

REASON: All bats and their roosts are legally protected by the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 and the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010. If bats are present it is illegal to intentionally or recklessly kill, injure or take any individuals or to deliberately capture or disturb individuals. It is an offence to intentionally or recklessly damage or destroy a roost, to obstruct a roost, and to disturb an individual whilst occupying the roost.

22 No external lighting shall be installed or affixed to any buildings on the site unless the Local

Planning Authority has first approved in writing details of position, height, design and intensity. Any that needs to be installed should be downward facing and directed away from any sensitive areas, including mature trees and hedgerows, bat flight paths, potential or known bat access points and any installed artificial roosts. The design of the lighting scheme should follow the recommendations given in the Bat Conservation Trust’s advice note on bats and lighting in the UK (BCT, 2008).

- 24 -

REASON: To consider the impacts of development on bats (Biodiversity Action Plan priority species) and contribute towards the protection and recovery of priority species populations, in accordance with paragraphs 84 and 85 of ODPM circular 06/2005, paragraph 117 of the National Planning Policy Framework and sections 40(1) and 40(3) of the NERC Act 2006. The NPPF states that by encouraging good design, planning policies and decisions should limit the impact of light pollution from artificial light on nature conservation.

Permission is granted for the Following Reasons The proposed development of the site complies with the National Planning Policy Framework March 2012 and both the Council's land use policies relating to windfall housing sites and also emerging planning policy. The proposal would have an acceptable impact on the character and appearance of the area and the Conservation Area within which the site lies and would not harm the amenity of neighbouring land users. There would be no adverse effects on the operation of the local highway network and no prejudice to highway safety. The proposed development would be accessible by a choice of means of transport and adequate parking provision would be made. Finally, the proposal would mitigate against any disturbance to protected species residing at the site. In reaching its decision in respect of this application, the Council has had regard to the following policies of the Stevenage District Plan Second Review 1991-2011:- TW1, which relates to sustainable development; TW2, which relates to structural open space; TW8, which relates to the Council’s development control standards and criteria; TW9, which requires developments to achieve a high standard of design; TW11, which relates to planning requirements; H7, which is an assessment of windfall housing sites; H8, which relates to the density of residential development; H14, which relates to the benefits of affordability; T6, which relates to design standards for developments; T12, which relates to bus provision; T13, which seeks to provide for the needs of cyclists in conjunction with major developments; T14, which seeks to provide for the needs of pedestrians in conjunction with major developments; T15, which relates to the provision of on-site car parking; EN9, which relates to archaeology and development; EN13, which relates to trees in new developments; EN27, which relates to noise pollution; L15, which relates to outdoor sports provision in residential developments; L16, which relates to children’s play space provision in residential developments; L17, which relates to informal open space provision in residential developments; L18, which relates to open space maintenance; SC1, which relates to the retention of social and community facilities; and SC9, which relates to redundant school buildings. And the advice contained in: The National Planning Policy Framework March 2012. Pro-active statement Planning permission has been granted for this proposal. The Council acted pro-actively through positive engagement with the applicant at the pre-application stage and during the determination process which lead to improvements to the scheme. The Council has therefore acted pro-actively in line with the requirements of the Framework (paragraphs 186 and 187).

- 25 -

9.2 That Conservation Area Consent Ref 12/00608/CAC be GRANTED subject to the following conditions.

1 The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in general accordance with the

following approved plans: 12005wd2.01 and 02. REASON:- For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning 2. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from

the date of this permission. REASON:- To comply with the requirements of Section 18 of the Planning (Listed Buildings

and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 3 No demolition/development shall take place/commence until an Archaeological Written

Scheme of Investigation has been submitted to and approved by the local planning authority in writing. The scheme shall include an assessment of archaeological significance and research questions; and: 1. The programme and methodology of site investigation and recording 2. The programme for post investigation assessment 3. Provision to be made for analysis of the site investigation and recording 4. Provision to be made for publication and dissemination of the analysis and records of

the site investigation 5. Provision to be made for archive deposition of the analysis and records of the site

investigation 6. Nomination of a competent person or persons/organisation to undertake the works set

out within the Archaeological Written Scheme of Investigation.

The demolition/development shall take place/commence in accordance with the programme of archaeological works set out in the Written Scheme of Investigation set out above.

The development shall not be occupied until the site investigation and post investigation assessment has been completed in accordance with the programme set out in the Written Scheme of Investigation approved above and the provision made for analysis and publication where appropriate. REASON: - To ensure that the proposal makes provision for the suitable recording of the existing structures on site in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework March 2012.

4 No demolition of buildings shall be carried out on site between the 1st March and 31st August inclusive in any year, unless searched beforehand by a suitably qualified ornithologist.

REASON: It is an offence under Part I, section 1(1) of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) to damage or destroy the nest of any wild bird whilst that nest is in use or being built.

5 No demolition or other work to existing buildings is to take place until a bat survey report

and mitigation scheme has been submitted to the Local Planning Authority for approval in writing. This is to include the results of full surveys for bats complying with best practice guidelines (Bat Conservation Trust, 2012). If bats are present, a Method Statement (as for European Protected Species mitigation licence) including Mitigation Strategy and Works Schedule must be submitted, stating how it is proposed to accommodate each species of bat within the new development.

REASON: All bats and their roosts are legally protected by the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 and the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010. If bats are present it is illegal to intentionally or recklessly kill, injure or take any individuals or to deliberately capture or disturb individuals. It is an offence to intentionally or recklessly damage or destroy a roost, to obstruct a roost, and to disturb an individual whilst occupying the roost.

- 26 -

Conservation Area Consent is granted for the following reason The proposed demolition works are considered appropriate and would not harm the character and appearance of the Old town Conservation Area in accordance with the advice contained in the National Planning Policy Framework.

10. BACKGROUND DOCUMENTS 1. The application file, forms, plans and supporting documents having the reference number relating to this item. 2. Letters received containing representations referred to in this report. 3. Responses to consultations with statutory undertakers and other interested parties referred to in this report. 4. Stevenage District Plan Second Review 1991-2011. 5. Stevenage Borough Council Supplementary Planning Documents – Parking Provision adopted January 2012 and the Stevenage Design Guide adopted October 2009. 6. Central Government advice contained in the National Planning Policy Framework March 2012.