Little Hadham Neighbourhood Plan

Transcription

1 Little Hadham Neighbourhood Plan Site Assessment Little Hadham Parish Council vember 2017 Final

2 This page is intentionally blank.

3 Quality information Project Role Name Position Actions Summary Signature Date Researcher and report writer QA Charlotte Simpson Una McGaughrin Planner Associate Planner Qualifying Body Will Wright, Little Hadham Parish Council Project Coordinator Jessica Boekhoff Undertook site assessment, compiled draft report 10/10/2017 QA of draft for comment 16/10/2017 Provide comment By 04/11/2017 Consultant Final proofread 21/11/2017

4 Prepared for: Little Hadham Parish Council Prepared by: Infrastructure & Environment UK Limited Aldgate Tower 2 Leman Street London E1 8FA United Kingdom aecom.com Infrastructure & Environment UK Limited ( ) has prepared this Report for the sole use of Little Hadham Parish Council ( Client ) in accordance with the Agreement under which our services were performed. other warranty, expressed or implied, is made as to the professional advice included in this Report or any other services provided by. Where the conclusions and recommendations contained in this Report are based upon information provided by others it is upon the assumption that all relevant information has been provided by those parties from whom it has been requested and that such information is accurate. Information obtained by has not been independently verified by, unless otherwise stated in the Report. The methodology adopted and the sources of information used by in providing its services are outlined in this Report. The work described in this Report was undertaken in the period July 2017 to vember 2017 and is based on the conditions encountered and the information available during the said period of time. The scope of this Report and the services are accordingly factually limited by these circumstances. Where assessments of works or costs identified in this Report are made, such assessments are based upon the information available at the time and where appropriate are subject to further investigations or information which may become available. disclaim any undertaking or obligation to advise any person of any change in any matter affecting the Report, which may come or be brought to s attention after the date of the Report. Certain statements made in the Report that are not historical facts may constitute estimates, projections or other forward-looking statements and even though they are based on reasonable assumptions as of the date of the Report, such forward-looking statements by their nature involve risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from the results predicted. specifically does not guarantee or warrant any estimate or projections contained in this Report. Where field investigations are carried out, these have been restricted to a level of detail required to meet the stated objectives of the services. The results of any measurements taken may vary spatially or with time and further confirmatory measurements should be made after any significant delay in issuing this Report. Copyright This Report is the copyright of Infrastructure & Environment UK Limited. Any unauthorised reproduction or usage by any person other than the addressee is strictly prohibited.

5 Table of Contents Executive Summary Introduction Background Documents reviewed Planning Policy Emerging East Herts District Plan, Pre-Submission version Identified Sites SLAA Sites Sites considered through the neighbourhood plan Methodology for the site appraisal Introduction Task 1: Defining the approach to use Approach to SLAA sites Approach to assessment of dwelling capacity Task 2: Development of site appraisal pro-forma Task 3: Complete Site Pro-formas Task 4: Consolidation of Results Summary of site appraisals Conclusions Site Assessment Conclusions Next Steps Viability...28 Appendix A Completed site appraisal pro-formas...30

6 Abbreviations used in the report Abbreviation DCLG DEFRA DPD EHDC Ha LHPC NP NPPF PDL PPG SLAA Department of Communities and Local Government Department of the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Development Plan Document East Herts District Council Hectare Little Hadham Parish Council Neighbourhood Plan National Planning Policy Framework Previously Developed Land Planning Policy Guidance (DCLG) Strategic Land Availability Assessment

7 Executive Summary Background Site selection and allocations is one of the most contentious aspects of planning, raising strong feelings amongst local people, landowners, developers and businesses. It is important that any selection process carried out is transparent, fair, robust and defensible and that the same criteria and through process is applied to each potential site. Equally important is the way in which the work is recorded and communicated to interested parties so the approach is transparent and defensible. The Little Hadham Neighbourhood Plan, which will cover the whole of Little Hadham Parish in the district of East Herts, is being prepared in the context of the emerging District Plan and the existing Local Plan. It is the intention for Little Hadham Parish Council to allocate sites for development in the Neighbourhood Plan. Little Hadham Parish Council has a made a good start in preparing the Neighbourhood Plan and it is now looking to ensure that key aspects of its proposals will be robust and defensible. In this context, the Parish Council has asked to undertake an independent and objective assessment of the sites that have been identified as having potential for housing for inclusion in the Neighbourhood Plan. The emerging District Plan sets out an allocation of at least 16,390 new homes by 2033 across East Herts, an average of 745 per annum across the plan period. Within the villages of East Herts, 300 homes are planned as a collective within the first five years. 500 homes are planned in total over the whole planning period ( ) as a collective in the villages. The purpose of the site appraisal is therefore to produce a clear assessment as to which of the potential sites are most suitable to meet the Neighbourhood Plan requirements and objectives. The site appraisal is intended to guide decision making and provide evidence for the eventual site selection to help ensure that the Neighbourhood Plan can meet Basic Conditions considered by the local planning authority (East Herts District Council), as well as any potential legal challenges by developers and other interested parties. East Herts District Council assessed a number of sites in Little Hadham through technical work (SLAA) to support the Local Plan. This work has been reviewed, as well as an assessment of new sites that have arisen since (Call for Sites), as part of s site assessment. Site Appraisal Summary The assessment has found that there are seven sites that are suitable for housing through the Neighbourhood Plan. In total, the seven sites could provide approximately 65 homes. 1

8 1. Introduction 1.1 Background This report is an independent site appraisal for the Little Hadham Neighbourhood Plan on behalf of Little Hadham Parish Council (LHPC) carried out by planning consultants. The work undertaken was agreed with the Parish Council and the Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG) in August The Neighbourhood Plan, which will cover Little Hadham parish in East Herts District Council (Figure 1.1), is being prepared in the context of the emerging District Plan and the adopted Local Plan. The Parish Council intends the Neighbourhood Plan, when adopted, to include allocations for housing. The Parish Council has made good progress in undertaking the initial stages of preparation for the Neighbourhood Plan, and it is now looking to ensure that key aspects of its proposals will be robust and defensible. In this context, the Parish Council has asked to undertake an independent and objective assessment of the sites that have been identified for housing in the Neighbourhood Plan s call for sites. The purpose of the site appraisal is therefore to produce a clear indication of which of the identified sites are appropriate for allocation in the neighbourhood plan. For this to be the case, they must be suitable, available and viable for the development proposed. The site appraisal is intended to guide decision making and provide evidence for the eventual site selection to help ensure that the Neighbourhood Plan can meet the Basic Conditions 1 considered by the Independent Examiner, as well as any potential legal challenges by developers and other interested parties. Little Hadham s Local Authority is East Herts District Council (EHDC), whose adopted development plan includes the Local Plan Second Review (DPD) The emerging Local Plan is the East Herts District Plan ( ) 3, which has currently been submitted to the Secretary of State by East Herts District Council and Examination hearings are currently taking place. Neighbourhood Plans will form part of the development plan for East Herts, alongside, but not as a replacement for the adopted Local Plan and emerging District Plan. Neighbourhood plans are required to be in conformity with the strategic policies of the Local Plan and can develop policies and proposals to address local place-based issues. In this way it is intended for the adopted Local Plan and emerging District Plan to provide a clear overall strategic direction for development in East Herts, whilst enabling finer detail to be determined through the neighbourhood planning process where appropriate. The emerging District Plan, based on the findings from the West Essex and East Hertfordshire Strategic Housing Market Assessment 2015 (SHMA) 4, concludes that the housing need for East Herts is 16,390 by 2033 which equates to 745 new homes per year. Within the villages of East Herts, 300 homes are planned as a collective within the first five years. 500 homes are planned in total over the whole planning period ( ) as a collective in the villages. The implication of the emerging Local Plan is that Little Hadham and other villages developing Neighbourhood Plans will allocate the development needed through their Plans. EHDC have assessed a number of sites in Little Hadham through the technical work to support the Local Plan, specifically the Strategic Land Availability Assessment (SLAA) (March 2017) 5. The SLAA considered a total of sixteen sites within the parish and accepted only one. This site appraisal has therefore considered 17 sites in total in Little Hadham, some of which have already been formally assessed by EHDC through the SLAA process. The sites that were not assessed in the SLAA were assessed through a desk top appraisal followed by a site visit to ascertain whether the site would be appropriate for development 1 Available at 2 Available at 3 Available at 4 Available at 5 Available at 2

9 Figure Map of the Little Hadham Neighbourhood Plan area 3

10 1.2 Documents reviewed A number of sources have been reviewed in order to understand the history and the context for the Neighbourhood Plan site allocations. These comprise: Adopted East Herts Local Plan Second Review, 2007; Emerging East Herts District Plan, Pre-Submission version 2016; East Herts District Plan Strategic Land Availability Assessment, March 2017; Information provided verbally and in writing by Little Hadham Parish Council; Natural England s Agricultural Land Quality Mapping for the East of England 6 ; Google Maps and Google Street View 7 ; and DEFRA Magic Map Planning Policy The Neighbourhood Plan policies and allocations must be in accordance with the strategic policies of the Local Plan, both emerging and adopted. However there are no policies within the adopted Local Plan that are deemed to apply to the sites assessed in Little Hadham. Therefore only the emerging plan has been considered below Emerging East Herts District Plan, Pre-Submission version 2016 Emerging District Plan policies relevant to Little Hadham include: Policy DSP1 Housing, Employment and Retail Growth: In the period 2011 to 2033 the Council will: a) Provide for a minimum of 16,390 new homes in the District up to 2033; b) Achieve a minimum of additional jobs in East Herts each year. This will include making provision for hectares of new employment land for B1/B2/B8 uses; and c) Encourage an additional 7,600m2 of convenience and 6,100m of comparison retail floorspace in the District. Policy DSP2 The Development Strategy : Brownfield locations in towns will be prioritised for mixeduse development. The remainder of the housing and development needs in the Plan period will be met on a range of greenfield sites across the District. Policy DPS3 Housing Supply : In the first five years ( ) 300 dwellings will be supplied within villages. A total of 500 dwellings will be supplied between 2011 and 2033 within villages. Policy GBR2 Rural Area Beyond the Green Belt: Development will be allowed if it is: a) Limited infill or the partial or complete redevelopment of previously developed sites (brownfield Land), which would not have a greater impact than the existing development on the rural character and appearance of the site and its surroundings; or b) Rural exception housing in accordance with Policy HOU4; or c) Development identified in an adopted Neighbourhood Plan. 6 Available at 7 Both available at 8 Available at 4

11 Policy VILL2 Group 2 Villages: Little Hadham and Hadham Ford are both identified as Group 2 villages. Limited infill development, together with small-scale employment, leisure, recreation and community facilities will be permitted subject to: a) Relate well to the village in terms of location, layout and connectivity; b) Be of a scale appropriate to the size of the village having regard to the potential cumulative impact of development in the locality; c) t represent the loss of a significant open space or gap important to the form and/or setting of the village; d) t represent an extension of ribbon development or an addition to an isolated group of buildings; e) t unacceptably block important views or vistas and/or detract from the openness of the countryside; and f) t be significantly detrimental to the amenity of neighbouring occupiers. In addition, small-scale development identified in an adopted Neighbourhood Plan will be permitted. Policy HOU2 Housing Density: In villages, lower new densities may be more appropriate to respond to local character and context. Policy HOU4 Rural Exception Affordable Housing Sites: Proposals for rural exception affordable housing schemes, on sites that would not normally be acceptable for general housing development, may be permitted, subject to the following criteria: a) The exception site is adjacent to an existing built-up area boundary, or is well related to existing residential development and amenities located in, or adjacent to, a clearly identifiable village or settlement; b) The proposed development will contribute towards meeting an identified need for affordable housing within the parish; and c) The proposed development would be appropriate to the settlement area in which it is proposed to be located in terms of scale, form and character. 1.4 Identified Sites This section sets out sites already identified through the East Herts Strategic Land Availability Assessment 2017 and the Parish Council s Call for Sites SLAA Sites The SLAA 2017 assessed the sites in Little Hadham listed in Table 1.1 and illustrated in Figure 1.2 and Figure 1.3. Table 1 indicates a total SLAA-based capacity of 17 dwellings at Little Hadham. rmally, only the sites put forward by the group that have not been assessed in the SLAA will be assessed in detail in this report. However for some of the sites that were deemed as unsuitable, the SLAA notes that these sites could be considered suitable if brought forward by a Neighbourhood Plan, and as a result these sites have been assessed in this report. 5

12 Table Sites identified at Little Hadham in the East Herts SLAA 2017 Site Ref. Site Name Performance Summary of reason(s) given Assessed capacity (dw ellings) 31/001 Field 5155 (land south of Stortford Road) Rejected The site is not w ell related to the existing settlement and development w ould represent an unacceptable extension to existing ribbon development. The site is also w ithin the Rural Area Beyond the Green Belt and therefore is unsuitable. 0 (site rejected) 31/002 Land and buildings at Little Hadham Rejected Currently unsuitable because of landscape issues and flood risk, but could be considered suitable in the future once the Little Hadham bypass and associated flood alleviation measures are constructed. 0 (site rejected) 31/003 Land at Bury Green Farm Rejected As Bury Green is a Group 3 village, the site is considered to be unsuitable for the scale of development envisaged. 31/004 Land at rear of Florence Cottage 31/005 Paddock adjacent to Barrans 31/006 Land east of Ashcroft Farm Rejected Rejected Suitable, available and achievable 31/007 Field behind Foxearth Site not assessed as it falls below the 0.25ha threshold 31/024 Land south of Stortford Road 31/025 Hadham Industrial Estate & Church End Farm Rejected Rejected Access to the site is an issue, as w ell as it being covered in mature trees w hich contribute to the character of this part of the village. Development in this isolated location w ould result in an unacceptable incursion into the countryside, impacting on the openness of the Green Belt. The site is regarded as infill development and so is considered for limited development. Located w ithin the Rural Area Beyond the Green Belt. The site does not relate w ell to the existing settlement and w ould represent an unacceptable incursion into the countryside. Located w ithin the Rural Area Beyond the Green Belt. Development of the site in isolation w ould be unacceptable but it could form part of a larger strategic scale of development. 0 (site rejected) 0 (site rejected) 0 (site rejected) 5 dw ellings considered achievable. A further 12 dw ellings could be achieved subject to an amendment to the village boundary through a Neighbourhood Plan for Little Hadham. 0 (site rejected) 0 (site rejected) 6

13 Site Ref. Site Name Performance Summary of reason(s) given Assessed capacity (dw ellings) 31/026 Land at Site Hilly Rejected Located w ithin the Rural Area Beyond the Green Belt. The site is poorly related to Hadham Ford and development w ould represent an unacceptable incursion into the countryside. 31/027 Land north of Pathw ay Cottages Rejected Development in this location w ould lead to a significant reduction in the gap betw een Little Hadham and Hadham Ford. 31/028 Land north of Stanemede Rejected The site w ould not constitute as infill development in a Group 2 village and is therefore considered to be unsuitable. Development could though be brought forw ard through a Neighbourhood Plan. 31/029 Land south of The Smithy Rejected Development in this location w ould lead to a significant reduction in the gap betw een Little Hadham and Hadham Ford. 31/030 Land adjacent to Ashmeads Site not assessed as it falls below the 0.25ha threshold 0 (site rejected) 0 (site rejected) 0 (site rejected) 0 (site rejected) 7

14 Figure 1.2 Map (a) of the Little Hadham sites in the 2017 SLAA 8

15 Figure 1.3 Map (b) of the Little Hadham sites in the 2017 SLAA Sites considered through the neighbourhood plan Little Hadham Parish Council conducted a call for sites during the first half of The list, which is summarised in Table 1.2, is accompanied by a map of those sites in Figure 1.4 below (produced in Google Earth) that indicates two centres of gravity at the two village cores, one at the centre of Little Hadham and one at the centre of Hadham Ford. These are where the majority of the services are clustered. Of all the sites brought forward in the call for sites, five were assessed in the SLAA and were deemed as not being suitable and therefore were rejected. One site (Site 2) in the call for sites was assessed in the SLAA and was deemed to be suitable, achievable and available. However the EHDC noted that if the Neighbourhood Plan was to consider amending its village boundary, further dwellings could be brought forward on Site 2 than the estimated capacity in the SLAA. Site 3 was rejected in the SLAA but noted it could be brought forward through a 9

16 Neighbourhood Plan. As a result these two sites have been re-assessed in this report. Site 16, although rejected in the SLAA, could have possibility for development in the south-west corner, so this too will be re-assessed. 10

17 Figure 1.4 All potential sites considered 11

18 Table 1.2 All sites assessed in the Little Hadham Neighbourhood Plan Site Ref. SLAA Site Location/Address Proposed development Site area (ha) Landow ner Comment 1 Field to the South West of Appleby, Cradle End, SG11 2EF 2 31/006 Accepted in the SLAA considered for 5 dw ellings, could be considered for a further 12 subject to an amendment to the village boundary through the Neighbourhood Plan Ashcroft Farm, Stortford Road, adjacent to primary school Residential 1.36 Includes a paddock. Has current planning consent for a very large industrial/agricultural shed 3/17/1156/AGPN. Residential 0.9 The site is currently being deliberated by East Herts District Council (3/16/2015/FUL). This proposes the erection of five detached dw ellings, change of use of land to school playing fields and associated w orks. 3 31/002 (rejected) and 31/028 (rejected but could be brought forw ard through a Neighbourhood Plan). Land adjacent to the River Ash Residential 4.22 Three different development options have been suggested for this site. Planning application (3/17/0975/OUT) is currently being deliberated for the erection of 18 dw ellings. 4 Savernake, land on A120 Residential 0.65 The site faces the A Southacre, betw een the Ford to Bury Green 6 Acremore, betw een the Ford to Bury Green 7 31/003 (rejected) Former Glaxo Site in Bury Green Unknow n 2.64 The site contains a number of units (B1 commercial usage). The property has direct road access to Acremore Street and benefits from w ater and electricity supply services. Unknow n 0.63 ne Unknow n 4.83 Landow ner in discussion w ith District Council. This site features highly as a possible location that residents may support. 8 Millfield Lane, Bury Green Unknow n 1.16 ne 12

19 Site Ref. SLAA Site Location/Address Proposed development Site area (ha) Landow ner Comment 9 31/002 (rejected) Land at Church End Residential 0.49 The site could accommodate up to 10 dw ellings of a house mix, size and type. 10 Appleby, Cradle End Unknow n 0.46 Conversion of garage proposed. 11 Land adjacent to Bushes Croft, Cradle End SG11 2ER 12 Land adjacent to Ashmeads, the Ford Unknow n 0.18 Has permission (3/15/1722) for a stable block (August 2015). Residential 0.63 The design w ould need to ensure that housing w as not built to the rear of the property so to avoid the flood zone. Only w ant small scale development of about 4 dw ellings /002 (rejected), 31/027 (rejected) and 31/029 (rejected) Land opposite the Village Hall Residential 19.8 ne 14 31/026 (rejected) Storage yard, Side Hilly Residential 0.26 Could be developed for ten 2/3 bed units. 15 Albury Road, SG11 2DW Residential adjoining sites ow ned by father and son. Together could provide enough space for a new dw elling /002 (rejected) Land at Church End Farm (a) Residential 12.1 ne 17 31/002 (rejected) and 31/025 (rejected) Land at Church End Farm (b) Residential 6.47 ne 13

20 2. Methodology for the site appraisal 2.1 Introduction Site selection and allocation is one of the most contentious aspects of planning, raising strong feelings amongst local people, landowners, builders and businesses. It is important that any selection process carried out is transparent, fair, robust and defensible and that the same criteria and thought process is applied to each potential site. Equally important is the way in which the work is recorded and communicated to interested parties so the approach is transparent and defensible. The approach undertaken within this site appraisal is based primarily on the Government s National Planning Practice Guidance (Assessment of Land Availability) published in 2014 with ongoing updates. This contains guidance on the assessment of land availability and the production of a Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment (SHLAA) to contribute to a local authority s evidence base for a Local Plan. Although a Neighbourhood Plan is at a smaller scale than a Local Plan, the criteria for assessing the suitability of sites for housing are still appropriate. This includes an assessment of whether a site is suitable, available and viable. In this context, the methodology for carrying out the site appraisal is presented below. 2.2 Task 1: Defining the approach to use Approach to SLAA sites The role of s neighbourhood plan site assessments is to build on the conclusions of existing work by the local planning authority, rather than to duplicate it or challenge its conclusions (which were illustrated in Figure 1.2 and 1.3 previously). Any landowner or other party disputing the accuracy of the SLAA assessment should discuss their concerns with the Council. However we have chosen to reassess the south-west corner of SLAA site 31/002, which largely overlaps with Site 16. This is because even though we do agree with the SLAA conclusions, this part of the site could be examined in isolation and at a much smaller scale, and potentially be considered as infill development. The one SLAA site that was assessed by the Council as suitable for development that has not already been developed (namely Site 31/006, which largely overlaps site 2 in Figure 4 above) is considered suitable for development. However this site has been re-assessed as the SLAA notes that the site could hold more capacity if brought forward in a Neighbourhood Plan. SLAA site 31/028 (which overlaps with site 3) has also been reassessed as the SLAA concludes that even though it is rejected, it could be brought forward through a Neighbourhood Plan Approach to assessment of dwelling capacity We have applied an approach to housing density based on: 1. If the sites were previously included in the East Herts Strategic Land Availability Assessment (SLAA), the indicative housing capacity listed in that document was used; or 2. If appropriate densities were suggested in the Call for Sites; or 3. The existing densities of the immediate area to the site were used. Lower densities may be appropriate to apply to the sites in the Neighbourhood Plan than suggested in this report due to the rural nature of the village. It is recommended that number of houses allocated per site is consistent with the existing densities of the village and appropriate for the context and setting, taking into account the site specific characteristic and constraints. 14

21 2.3 Task 2: Development of site appraisal pro-forma Prior to carrying out the appraisal, site appraisal pro-formas were developed. The purpose of the proforma is to enable a rapid but robust and consistent evaluation of each site through the consideration of an established set of parameters against which each site can be then appraised. The pro-forma utilised for the assessment enables a range of information to be recorded, including the following: Background information: Site location and use; and Site background and planning history. Context: Type of site (greenfield, brownfield, etc.); and Planning history. Suitability: Site characteristics; Environmental considerations; Heritage considerations; Community facilities and services; and Other key considerations (e.g. flood risk, agricultural land, tree preservation orders). Availability. 2.4 Task 3: Complete Site Pro-formas The next task was to complete the site pro-formas. This was done through a combination of a desktop assessment and site visits. The desktop assessment involved a review of the conclusions of the existing evidence and using other sources including google maps/streetview and MAGIC maps 9 in order to judge whether a site is suitable for the use proposed. The site visits allowed the team to consider aspects of the site assessment that could only be done visually. It was also an opportunity to gain a better understanding of the context and nature of the neighbourhood plan area. The completed pro-formas for all sites assessed are provided in Appendix Task 4: Consolidation of Results Following the site visit, the desk top assessment was revisited to finalise the assessment and compare the sites to judge which were the most suitable to meet the housing requirement. 9 Available at 15

22 3. Summary of site appraisals A number of sites were assessed to consider whether they would be appropriate for allocation in the Little Hadham Neighbourhood Plan. These include sites that were submitted through the Neighbourhood Plan Steering Group s Call for Sites. Table 3.1 sets out a summary of the site assessments. This includes the EHDC SLAA conclusion regarding each SLAA sites developability and the conclusions of the Neighbourhood Plan site assessment. The final column is a traffic light rating for each site, indicating whether the site is appropriate for allocation. Red indicates the site is not appropriate for allocation through the Neighbourhood Plan. Green indicates the site is appropriate for allocation through the Neighbourhood Plan. Amber indicates the site is less sustainable, or may be appropriate for allocation through the Neighbourhood Plan if certain issues can be resolved or constraints mitigated. All sites are considered to be available for development, as they were submitted through the Call for Sites or assessed as available in the SLAA. From the Call for Sites process, two sites were considered to be suitable for allocation but with minor constraints. Five sites were considered to be suitable for allocation but with some significant constraints. These constraints include nearby heritage assets, a large distance from community facilities and services, restrictive access and flooding. Ten sites were not considered suitable for allocation. Table 3.1 should be read alongside the completed pro-formas presented in Appendix A. 16

23 Table Summary of results of site appraisal for Little Hadham Neighbourhood Plan Site Ref. Site Address Site size (Ha) Dw elling yield ( assessment) SLAA Conclusion Neighbourhood Plan Site Assessment 1 Field to the South West of Appleby, Cradle End SG11 2EF (based on 5 N/A dw ellings per hectare, w hich is the average density of the existing built up area of Cradle End) This site is considered suitable for allocation but has some significant constraints. The site is w ithin the Policy Area of Rural Area Beyond the Green Belt in the Adopted East Herts Local Plan Second Review, This only allow s residential development as infill development w ithin the built up area of Little Hadham. As a result, residential development here w ould be contrary to the adopted policy. How ever in the emerging District Plan for East Herts, Policy GBR2 notes that development in the Rural Area Beyond the Green Belt can take place if it is development identified in an adopted Neighbourhood Plan or development brought forw ard under a Community Right to Build Order in an adopted Neighbourhood Plan. This indicates potential for Little Hadham Neighbourhood Plan to promote housing development on this site w ithin their Neighbourhood Plan. Existing hedgerow s w ould need to be maintained to provide continued mitigation for the nearby heritage assets and the view s into the surrounding area. The indicative capacity is based on dw ellings per hectare but it is likely that due to the distance from community facilities and services, the number of homes on this site that w ould be supported by EHDC w ould be closer to 30 dph. 2 Ashcroft Farm, Stortford Road, adjacent to primary school (based on SLAA conclusions) Tw o thirds of the site in the north lies w ithin a SLAA site that w as assessed. The follow ing relates to this part of the site. This is a greenfield site located to the south of Stortford Road. The site consists of a flat, open field. The site is constrained as it is located w ithin Rural Area Beyond the Green Belt. How ever, the site is located in close proximity to local services and facilities. The site has been promoted through the Call for Sites by the landow ner and is considered to be available. The The site is considered suitable for allocation. The site has existing good access for future development and is positioned in an accessible location. It benefits from both the A120 and adjacent bus routes to Bishop s Stortford. It also benefits from the nearby centre of Little Hadham and its community facilities and services. The existing hedgerow s on the boundaries of the site should be maintained for landscape mitigation and to 17

24 Site Ref. Site Address Site size (Ha) Dw elling yield ( assessment) SLAA Conclusion Neighbourhood Plan Site Assessment site is considered achievable. The site is regarded as infill development and so is considered to be suitable for limited development (5 dw ellings) in accordance w ith Group 2 village policy. Further development (up to an additional 12 dw ellings) could be identified w ithin a Neighbourhood Plan subject to an amendment to the village boundary through a Neighbourhood Plan. maintain any ecological value they may hold. There are no heritage assets w ithin or adjacent to the site, and no environmental constraints, except flood zone 2 along the access route, w hich should not provide a constraint. There w ill be loss to Grade 3 agricultural land, but as the site currently appears to only be used for pasture, this does not seem to be a major constraint. The site is w ithin the Policy Area of Rural Area Beyond the Green Belt in the Adopted East Herts Local Plan Second Review, This only allow s residential development as infill development w ithin the built up area of Little Hadham. As a result, residential development here w ould be in agreement to adopted policy. 3 Land adjacent to the River Ash (based on SLAA conclusions) 75 per cent of the site lies w ithin the much bigger SLAA site 31/002. The follow ing relates to this 75 per cent. This is a very large greenfield site (SLAA site 31/002), consisting of a number of open fields around the village of Little Hadham. The River Ash runs through the site, along the eastern half on a north-south axis. Along the line of the river, the site lies w ithin Flood Zone 3 w ith a risk of Surface Water Flooding although the construction of the Little Hadham bypass and associated flood alleviation measures should largely address this issue. While the site could form part of a larger strategic scale of development in this location in the future, it is currently considered to be unsuitable. The site has been promoted through the Call for Sites by the landow ner and is considered to be available. The site is considered achievable at present. How ever, in order to deliver a strategic scale of development, major infrastructure w ould be required. 25 per cent of the site lies w ithin the SLAA site 31/028. The follow ing relates to this 25 per cent. This is a greenfield site located to the north of Little Hadham, w ithin the Rural Area Beyond the Green Belt. There are a number of TPO designations along the w estern boundary of The w estern part of the site (i.e. the part of the site w ithin SLAA site boundary 31/028) is considered as being suitable for allocation but does have some minor constraints. This part of the site currently only has access from a public footpath. This w ould need improving for any future development, w hich may result in the loss of some hedgerow s. How ever the site is very accessible w ith being less than 400m from the A120 and bus services to Bishop s Stortford. It is also moderately located from the local centre of Little Hadham. The site has no heritage assets w ithin or adjacent to the site and limited environmental designations except flood risk along the eastern edge, w hich should be easily avoided. There could be some ecological value w ithin the hedgerow s and mature trees bordering the site, w hich should be examined further in a planning application, w ith relevant mitigation put in place. View s of the site into the adjacent fields should also be mitigated, possibly w ith new 18

25 Site Ref. Site Address Site size (Ha) Dw elling yield ( assessment) SLAA Conclusion Neighbourhood Plan Site Assessment the site. It is relatively w ell related to the existing built up area of Little Hadham but does not constitute infill development in a Group 2 village and is therefore currently considered to be unsuitable. The site has been promoted through the Call for Sites by the landow ner and is considered to be available. The site is considered achievable. How ever the site is considered suitable for development if it is brought forw ard through a Neighbourhood Plan and subject to an amendment to the village boundary in the Neighbourhood Plan. hedgerow s. The development of this site w ill result in the loss of Grade 3 Agricultural land, but as most land w ithin and surrounding Little Hadham is Grade 2 or 3, this is not seen as a major constraint. The site is w ithin the Policy Area of Rural Area Beyond the Green Belt in the Adopted East Herts Local Plan Second Review, This only allow s residential development as infill development w ithin the built up area of Little Hadham. As a result, residential development here w ould be contrary to the adopted policy. How ever in the emerging District Plan for East Herts, Policy GBR2 notes that development in the Rural Area Beyond the Green Belt can take place if it is development identified in an adopted Neighbourhood Plan or development brought forw ard under a Community Right to Build Order in an adopted Neighbourhood Plan. This indicates potential for Little Hadham Neighbourhood Plan to promote housing development on this site w ithin their Neighbourhood Plan. 4 Savernake, land on A120 5 Southacre, betw een the Ford to Bury Green N/A The site is currently considered unsuitable for allocation due to it being w ithin the Metropolitan Green Belt. In future editions of the District Plan, the Neighbourhood Group could lobby for this site to be taken out of the Green Belt if they w ish for it to be developed. The site is more than 800m aw ay from any community facilities or services w hich is a major constraint. The site w ould need a Phase 1 Habitat survey undertaken to rule out w orks having an impact on the natural environment due to the variety of mature trees w ithin it. Existing hedgerow s means view s are protected. There are no heritage assets w ithin or adjacent to the site N/A The site is considered unsuitable for allocation due to significant constraints. 19

26 Site Ref. Site Address Site size (Ha) Dw elling yield ( assessment) SLAA Conclusion Neighbourhood Plan Site Assessment The site is of significant size that it contradicts the emerging District Plan s Policy VILL2. It is in an isolated location aw ay from the main villages and w ould add addition to an isolated group of buildings. The existing hedgerow s could have some ecological value and protect view s for adjacent listed buildings; these w ould need to be retained. Further hedgerow planting w ould be needed to protect the view s onto the adjacent fields. There are no environmental designations on the site. 6 Acremore, betw een the Ford to Bury Green 7 Former Glaxo Site in Bury Green N/A The site is not considered suitable for allocation due to having a significant constraint. If the existing buildings are retained, access to this site w ould rely on access through Site 5, w hich is considered unsuitable for development (based on 5 dw ellings per hectare, w hich is the average density of the existing built up area of Bury Green) The site is currently considered unsuitable and unavailable for development. Even though the site contains vacant offices, development on this site w ould result in the loss of an employment site. The site is also relatively w ell related to the existing settlement of Bury Green but, as this is a Group 3 village, the site is considered to be unsuitable for the scale of development envisaged. There are no environmental designations on this site but the site boundary does include a listed building. Hedgerow planting w ould be required to protect view s onto adjacent fields. The site is considered potentially suitable for development but does have significant constraints, particularly its location, isolated from facilities and services and therefore a car dependent location, and also the issue of providing access. This is a former employment site that now contains vacant offices in the south, an access road and brow nfield land. In the 2007 Local Plan it w as designated as a Major Developed Site in policy GBC4. A planning application w as then permitted in 2008 for the redevelopment of the site for continuing employment, but this has never been implemented. This is a site that has poor existing transport connections, no community facilities or services in close proximity, and has not been in active employment use since GlaxoSmithKline. In EDHC s existing evidence base, 2017 SLAA, they conclude that the site is not suitable for 20

27 Site Ref. Site Address Site size (Ha) Dw elling yield ( assessment) SLAA Conclusion Neighbourhood Plan Site Assessment residential development because of the scale of development compared to Bury Green, and the site is considered not available because development w ould result in the loss of an employment site. How ever, in the adopted Local Plan from 2007, Policy EDE2 states that development w hich w ould cause the loss of an existing employment site, or one that w as last in employment use, w ill only be permitted subject to all the follow ing criteria being met (our comments in italics): a) The retention of the site or premises for employment use has been fully w ithout success, evidence of w hich must be provided The site has not been in active use since at least 2007, even with approved planning permission in b) The proposed use does not have a significant adverse impact on the amenity of the adjacent area or nearby occupiers residential development here would not have an adverse impact if limited to a small quantity. c) Access, parking and servicing arrangements are satisfactory access is difficult it could potentially be through Farm place, The Grove or the existing access road from Milfield Lane. As a result, w e recommend that this site is discussed w ith East Herts (planning and highw ays officers) to understand w hether it w ould be supported as an allocation for a small amount of housing, and if access could be provided. If a residential allocation w as considered, it should be a small portion of the site currently occupied by the industrial buildings, and of a similar scale to the recent farm place development (approximately 12 dw ellings). This recommendation should be considered in the context of the site assessment as a w hole, w hich show s that there are other sites w ithin the NP area that are more suited for allocation because they are better located to community facilities and services. Alternatively the site could be allocated for employment w hich is more likely to be 21

28 Site Ref. Site Address Site size (Ha) Dw elling yield ( assessment) SLAA Conclusion Neighbourhood Plan Site Assessment supported by EHDC. 8 Millfield Lane, Bury Green (based on 5 N/A dw ellings per hectare, w hich is the average density of the existing built up area of Bury Green) The site is considered suitable for allocation but has some significant constraints. Current access is only available through a public footpath. This w ould need to be improved or new access w ould need to be created off Millfield Lane to accommodate new development. There are no environmental designations w ithin the site, and all the view s are currently hidden by hedgerow s. The hedgerow s also provide a visual barrier to the adjacent listed building. The indicative capacity is based on dw ellings per hectare but it is likely that due to the distance from community facilities and services, the number of homes on this site that w ould be supported by EHDC w ould be low er (e.g. 34 as a maximum). The site is w ithin the Policy Area of Rural Area Beyond the Green Belt in the Adopted East Herts Local Plan Second Review, This only allow s residential development as infill development w ithin the built up area of Little Hadham. As a result, residential development here w ould be contrary to the adopted policy. How ever in the emerging District Plan for East Herts, Policy GBR2 notes that development in the Rural Area Beyond the Green Belt can take place if it is development identified in an adopted Neighbourhood Plan or development brought forw ard under a Community Right to Build Order in an adopted Neighbourhood Plan. This indicates potential for Little Hadham Neighbourhood Plan to promote housing development on this site w ithin their Neighbourhood Plan. 9 Land at Church End This is a very large greenfield site (SLAA site 31/002), consisting of a number of open fields around the village of Little Hadham. The River Ash runs through the site, along the eastern half on a north-south axis. Along the line of the river, the site lies w ithin Flood Zone 3 w ith a risk of Surface Water Flooding although the construction of the Little Hadham The site is not considered suitable for allocation. The SLAA rejected the site on the principle that it should be considered in the future once the Little Hadham bypass has been constructed. This w ill alleviate flood issues the area currently suffers from. The site could then be 22

29 Site Ref. Site Address Site size (Ha) Dw elling yield ( assessment) SLAA Conclusion Neighbourhood Plan Site Assessment bypass and associated flood alleviation measures should largely address this issue. While the site could form part of a larger strategic scale of development in this location in the future, it is currently considered to be unsuitable. The site has been promoted through the Call for Sites by the landow ner and is considered to be available. The site is considered achievable at present. How ever, in order to deliver a strategic scale of development, major infrastructure w ould be required. considered as part of a larger strategic allocation. 10 Appleby, Cradle End (based on 5 N/A dw ellings per hectare, w hich is the average density of the existing built up area of Cradle End) The site is considered suitable for allocation but does have some significant constraints. The site does not have any environmental designations. Existing hedgerow s provide mitigation for view s and the adjacent listed building; these w ould need to be retained. The indicative capacity is based on dw ellings per hectare but it is likely that due to the distance from community facilities and services, the number of homes on this site that w ould be supported by EHDC w ould be low er (e.g. 13 as a maximum). The site is w ithin the Policy Area of Rural Area Beyond the Green Belt in the Adopted East Herts Local Plan Second Review, This only allow s residential development as infill development w ithin the built up area of Little Hadham. As a result, residential development here w ould be contrary to the adopted policy. How ever in the emerging District Plan for East Herts, Policy GBR2 notes that development in the Rural Area Beyond the Green Belt can take place if it is development identified in an adopted Neighbourhood Plan or development brought forw ard under a Community Right to Build Order in an adopted Neighbourhood Plan. This indicates potential for Little Hadham Neighbourhood Plan to promote housing development on this site w ithin their Neighbourhood Plan. 11 Land adjacent to Bushes Croft, Cradle End SG N/A The site is not considered suitable for allocation. The site is w ithin the Metropolitan Green Belt. Development is only allow ed here if it is infill development, 23

30 Site Ref. Site Address Site size (Ha) Dw elling yield ( assessment) SLAA Conclusion Neighbourhood Plan Site Assessment 2ER w hich this site does not constitute as. The Landscape Character Assessment SPD (2007) states that for Area 86, w hich the site is w ithin, linear hamlets are a feature of this area but coalescence should be resisted. Development on this site w ould contribute to the coalescence betw een Cradle End and Bury Green. The site is also high quality agricultural land and is poorly located from community facilities and services. 12 Land adjacent to Ashmeads, the Ford (taken from Call for Sites) N/A The site is considered suitable for allocation but does have some significant constraints. There appears to be no current access onto the site from the B1004. Access w ould need to be created through the removal of young hedgerow s. The River Ash flow s along the north-w estern boundary of the site. This results in majority of the northern half of the site being w ithin Flood Zone 2 and 3. This significantly reduces the developable area of the site, w hich has resulted in the landow ner only suggesting 4 sites in the Call for Sites. The site also slopes w hich similarly affects the capacity of it. The site is extremely vegetated and has many young trees. A Phase 1 Habitat Survey should be considered before any development on site. The site is w ithin Hadham Ford Conservation Area. Development w ithin a conservation area has to comply w ith Policy BH6 from the adopted East Herts Local Plan, The site is in a favourable location to the community facilities and services located at Hadham Ford. 13 Land opposite the Village Hall The site lies w ithin three SLAA sites. SLAA site 31/002 is a very large greenfield site consisting of a number of open fields around the village of Little Hadham. The River Ash runs through the site, along the eastern half on a The site is not considered suitable for allocation. The site w as rejected in the SLAA on the primary reason that development here w ould lead to a significant reduction in the gap betw een Little Hadham and Hadham Ford. Also 24

31 Site Ref. Site Address Site size (Ha) Dw elling yield ( assessment) SLAA Conclusion Neighbourhood Plan Site Assessment north-south axis. Along the line of the river, the site lies w ithin Flood Zone 3 w ith a risk of Surface Water Flooding although the construction of the Little Hadham bypass and associated flood alleviation measures should largely address this issue. While the site could form part of a larger strategic scale of development in this location in the future, it is currently considered to be unsuitable. The site has been promoted through the Call for Sites by the landow ner and is considered to be available. The site is considered achievable at present. How ever, in order to deliver a strategic scale of development, major infrastructure w ould be required. SLAA site 31/027 is a greenfield site located w ithin the Rural Area Beyond the Green Belt. Development in this location w ould lead to a significant reduction in the gap betw een Little Hadham and Hadham Ford. The southern part of the site, w hich is closest to existing development, lies w ithin Flood Zone 3b. Development of the remaining part of the site, outside of Flood Zone 3b, w ould be unsuitable as it w ould be poorly related to the existing village. It is therefore considered to be unsuitable for future development. SLAA site 31/029 is a greenfield site located w ithin the Rural Area Beyond the Green Belt. Development in this location w ould lead to a significant reduction in the gap betw een Little Hadham and Hadham Ford. It is therefore considered to be unsuitable for future development. the part of the site that is closest to existing development lies w ithin Flood Zone 3b. It is therefore considered to be unsuitable for future development. 14 Storage yard, Side Hilly 15 Albury Road, SH11 2DW SLAA site 31/026 is a brow nfield site, located to the south of Hadham Ford w ithin the Rural Area Beyond the Green Belt and w ithin an Area of Archaeological Significance. This site, w hich is a disused pit, is poorly related to Hadham Ford. Development w ould represent an unacceptable incursion into the countryside in this location. The site is not considered suitable for allocation. The site w as rejected in the SLAA for tw o main reasons, it poorly relates to Hadham Ford, and development here w ould represent an unacceptable incursion into the countryside N/A The site is not considered suitable for allocation. The primary reason the site is not considered suitable is because of the access. The current access to the back of the site, w here it is assumed new development is 25

32 Site Ref. Site Address Site size (Ha) Dw elling yield ( assessment) SLAA Conclusion Neighbourhood Plan Site Assessment envisaged, is blocked by the existing residential dw ellings. Unless this can be resolved, this site cannot be considered suitable for further development. 16 Land at Church End Farm (a) 17 Land at Church End Farm (b) SLAA site 31/002 is a very large greenfield site consisting of a number of open fields around the village of Little Hadham. The River Ash runs through the site, along the eastern half on a north-south axis. Along the line of the river, the site lies w ithin Flood Zone 3 w ith a risk of Surface Water Flooding although the construction of the Little Hadham bypass and associated flood alleviation measures should largely address this issue. While the site could form part of a larger strategic scale of development in this location in the future, it is currently considered to be unsuitable. The site has been promoted through the Call for Sites by the landow ner and is considered to be available. The site is considered achievable at present. How ever, in order to deliver a strategic scale of development, major infrastructure w ould be required The site lies w ithin tw o SLAA sites. SLAA site 31/002 is a very large greenfield site consisting of a number of open fields around the village of Little Hadham. The River Ash runs through the site, along the eastern half on a north-south axis. Along the line of the river, the site lies w ithin Flood Zone 3 w ith a risk of Surface Water Flooding although the construction of the Little Hadham bypass and associated flood alleviation measures should largely address this issue. While the site could form part of a larger strategic scale of development in this location in the future, it is currently considered to be unsuitable. The site has been promoted through the Call for Sites by the landow ner and is considered to be available. The site is considered achievable at present. How ever, in order to deliver a strategic scale of development, major infrastructure w ould be required. SLAA site 31/025 is part greenfield located w ithin the Rural Area Beyond the Green Belt. The southern half of the site, which concerns our site, is greenfield and adjacent to the The site is not considered suitable for allocation. From initial assessments, decided to assess the south-w est corner of the site. From the outset it w as believed this area of the site could have potential, w ith being in close proximity to the existing built up area of Little Hadham, and therefore could be contrary to the SLAA conclusions. How ever after the site assessment, this part of the site is considered unsuitable for allocation. It is entirely w ithin Flood Zone 3. The site is also Grade 3 Agricultural Land and is w ithin active agricultural use. The site is not considered suitable for allocation. The SLAA rejected the site on the principle that it should be considered in the future once the Little Hadham bypass has been constructed. This w ill alleviate flood issues the area currently suffers from. The site could then be considered as part of a larger strategic development. 26

33 Site Ref. Site Address Site size (Ha) Dw elling yield ( assessment) SLAA Conclusion Neighbourhood Plan Site Assessment A120. There is no direct access to the southern half of the site. While development of the site in isolation w ould be unacceptable, it could form part of a larger strategic scale of development in this location in the future. 27

34 4. Conclusions 4.1 Site Assessment Conclusions 17 sites were assessed to consider whether they would be appropriate for allocation in the Little Hadham Neighbourhood Plan. These include sites that were submitted through the Neighbourhood Plan Steering Group s Call for Sites process. The site assessment needs to be understood in the context of Little Hadham as it is washed over by the policy designation The Rural Area beyond the Green Belt. In addition, part of the parish is within the Metropolitan Green Belt. Within the villages of East Herts, 300 homes are planned as a collective within the first five years. 500 homes are planned in total over the whole planning period ( ) as a collective in the villages. Table 3.1 sets out a summary of the site assessment and includes both the SLAA conclusion (where applicable) and the conclusions of the Neighbourhood Plan site assessment. From the Call for Sites process, two sites were considered to be suitable for allocation but with minor constraints. Five sites were considered to be suitable for allocation but with some significant constraints. These constraints include nearby heritage assets, large distance from community facilities and services, restrictive access and flooding. Ten sites were not considered suitable for allocation. This was because of coalescence, Green Belt, access and policy conformity issues. The sites that have been assessed as suitable or potentially suitable can be thought of as a pool of sties from which the most suitable can be selected as proposed allocations to meet the identified housing need. 4.2 Next Steps The suggested next steps are for the Neighbourhood Plan group to select the preferred sites to make up the housing requirement to contribute to the overall figure of 500 for all villages in East Herts. One approach would be to select the two sites found to be suitable with minimal constraints. These are sites 2 and 3. Together these would total 36 new homes. As the housing target is to be split between all the villages in East Herts, Little Hadham is not obliged to create housing for the total figure of 500. In fact, Group 2 villages, which Little Hadham and Hadham Ford fall into, are only permitted to bring forward infill development. However the SLAA contradicts this. As a result, the larger sites that are found to be suitable have been chosen due to the SLAA support for them. Another approach would be to select alternative sites to 2 and 3, if the group can demonstrate enough evidence to support proposing other sites from the shortlist of seven. The site selection process should be based on the following: The findings of this site assessment; Discussions with East Herts District Council; Local criteria that can be applied to differentiate between the suitable sites, in particular the extent to which the sites support the vision and objectives for the Neighbourhood Plan; and The potential for the sites to meet identified infrastructure needs of the community, with reference to the East Herts Infrastructure Delivery Plan Viability As part of the site selection process, it is recommended that the Steering Group discusses site viability with East Herts District Council. Viability appraisals for individual sites may already exist. If not, it is possible to use the Council s existing viability evidence (such as East Hert s Delivery Study) 10 Available at Plan/PDF/IDM.001_Infrastructure_Delivery_Plan.pdf 28

35 to test the viability of sites proposed for allocation in the Neighbourhood Plan. This can be done by matching site typologies used in existing reports, with sites proposed by the Steering Group to give an indication of whether a site is viable for development and therefore likely to be delivered. In addition, any landowner or developer promoting a site for development should be contacted to request evidence of viability. 29

36 Appendix A Completed site appraisal pro-formas 30

37 Site Assessment Proforma General information Site Reference / name 1 Site Address (or brief description of broad location) Field to the South West of Appleby, Cradle End, SG11 2EF Current use Proposed use Gross area (Ha) Total area of the site in hectares SHLAA site reference (if applicable) Method of site identification (e.g. proposed by landow ner etc) Agricultural fields and a paddock Residential 1.36 N/A NP Call for Sites Context Is the site: Greenfield: land (farmland, or open space, that has not previously been developed) Brow nfield: Previously developed land w hich is or w as occupied by a permanent structure, including the curtilage of the developed land and any associated infrastructure. Site planning history Have there been any previous applications for development on this land? What w as the outcome? Greenfield Brownfield Mixture Unknown 3/17/0592AGPN Agricultural shed Refuse Insufficient information submitted, an application for planning permission is required. 3/17/1156/AGPN Agricultural shed Prior Approval not required. Suitability Suitability 31

38 Is the current access adequate for the proposed development? If not, is there potential for access to be provided? Current access exists from a narrow lane, but this is not adequate to support development for residential. Access w ould need to be created of the lane going tow ards Bury Green, to be able to support development of houses. Is the site accessible? Provide details of site s connectivity The site is surrounded on all boundaries by lanew ays and is 0.45km aw ay from the A120. Environmental Considerations Questions Assessment guidelines Observations and comments Is the site w ithin or adjacent to the follow ing policy or environmental designations: Green Belt Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) National Park European nature site SSSI Impact Risk Zone Site of Importance for Nature Conservation Site of Geological Importance Flood Zones 2 or 3 Yes but limited and mitigation is already in place A tributary of the River Ash flow s along the northern boundary of the site w hich results in a minimal amount of Flood Zone 2. How ever flood mapping from the Environment Agency indicates some flood defences currently in place along this northern boundary. Ecological value? Could the site be home to protected species such as bats, great crested new ts, badgers etc.? Potential value Potentially from hedgerow s. Landscape Is the site low, medium or high sensitivity in terms of landscape? Low sensitivity: site not visible or less visible, existing landscape is poor quality, existing features could be retained Medium sensitivity: Site has only moderate impact on landscape character (e.g. in built up area); High sensitivity: Development w ould significantly detract from the landscape and important features unlikely to be retained- mitigation not possible Agricultural Land Loss of high quality agricultural land (Grades 1,2 or 3a) Low sensitivity to development Loss of Grade 2 agricultural land The site is located w ithin Area 86 (Perry Green Uplands) of the East Herts Landscape Character Assessment SPD (2007) w hich concludes that it is open, with narrow sunken lanes and very extensive views out but limited views within. The main landscape strategy for the area is conserve and strengthen. Linear hamlets are a feature of this area but coalescence should be resisted. Existing mature hedgerow s protect the view s onto open countryside from the site. These hedgerow s w ould need to be retained. Site falls w ithin Grade 2 (Very Good Agricultural Land). 32

39 Heritage considerations Question Is the site w ithin or adjacent to one or more of the follow ing heritage designations or assets? Conservation area Scheduled monument Registered Park and Garden Registered Battlefield Listed building Know n archaeology Locally listed building Assessment guidelines Small amount of mitigation w ould be required in the southeastern corner of the site Comments There is a listed building at Ivy Farm 0.05km to the south east of the site. How ever this is currently visually obstructed from the site by a mature hedgerow. Mitigation w ould be needed if the hedgerow w as removed due to development. Community facilities and services Is the site, in general terms, close/accessible to local amenities such as (but not limited to): Tow n centre/local centre/shop Employment location Public transport School(s) Open space/recreation/ leisure facilities Health facilities Cycle route(s) Poorly located Observations and comments The site is poorly located with respect to all community facilities and services. Where a site is poorly located if > 800m, Moderately located if 400m to 800m, and favourable located if < 400m from services. Other key considerations Are there any Tree Preservation Orders on the site? ne How ever some mature trees exist on the boundaries. What impact w ould development have on the site s habitats and biodiversity? Public Right of Way ne Site is an open field w ith hedgerow s. Impact can be identified through a Habitat 1 Survey, and potential impacts mitigated. Existing social or community value (provide details) Is the site likely to be affected by any of the following? Yes Comments Ground Contamination Significant infrastructure crossing the site i.e. pow er lines/ pipe lines, or in close proximity to hazardous 33

40 installations Characteristics Characteristics w hich may affect development on the site: Topography: Flat/ plateau/ steep gradient Coalescence Development w ould result in neighbouring tow ns merging into one another. Scale and nature of development w ould be large enough to significantly change size and character of settlement Comments Slight slope The site is of a large enough size on the edge of development in Cradle End to cause a change in the size and character of the existing settlement Availability Assessing the suitability of the site w ill give an indication of w hether the site has any constraints to development. It should consider aspects such as infrastructure, planning policy, local services, heritage and other considerations. Availability Yes Comments Is the site available for sale or development (if known)? Please provide supporting evidence. Submitted by landow ner in the Call for Sites Are there any know n legal or ow nership problems such as unresolved multiple ow nerships, ransom strips, tenancies, or operational requirements of landow ners? Is there a know n time frame for availability? 0-5 /6-10 / years. Any other comments? The site is w ithin the Policy Area of Rural Area Beyond the Green Belt in the Adopted East Herts Local Plan Second Review, This only allow s residential development as infill development w ithin the built up area of Little Hadham. As a result, residential development here w ould be contrary to the adopted policy. How ever in the emerging District Plan for East Herts, Policy GBR2 notes that development in the Rural Area Beyond the Green Belt can take place if it is development identified in an adopted Neighbourhood Plan or development brought forw ard under a Community Right to Build Order in an adopted Neighbourhood Plan. This indicates potential for Little Hadham Neighbourhood Plan to promote housing development on this site w ithin their Neighbourhood Plan. 34

41 4.0. Summary Assessing the suitability of the site w ill give an indication of w hether the site has any constraints to development. It should consider aspects such as infrastructure, planning policy, local services, heritage and other considerations. Conclusions The site is appropriate for allocation This site has minor constraints Please tick a box The site has significant constraints The site is unsuitable for allocation Potential housing development capacity: 6 (based on 5 dw ellings per hectare, w hich is the average density of the existing built up area of Cradle Green) Key evidence (3-4 bullet points) for decision to accept or discount site. The site is considered suitable for development but has significant constraints. The development of the site w ould result in a loss of very good agricultural land. Only a limited number of dw ellings w ould be acceptable as the site is poorly located from community facilities and services and large development on this site w ould significantly alter the character of Cradle End. Existing hedgerow s w ould need to be maintained to provide continued mitigation for the nearby heritage asset and the view s into the surrounding area. 35

42 Site Assessment Proforma General information Site Reference / name 2 Site Address (or brief description of broad location) Ashcroft Farm, Stortford Road, adjacent to primary school Current use Proposed use Gross area (Ha) Total area of the site in hectares SHLAA site reference (if applicable) Method of site identification (e.g. proposed by landow ner etc) Open Space/Agricultural Residential /006 NP Call for Sites Context Is the site: Greenfield: land (farmland, or open space, that has not previously been developed) Brow nfield: Previously developed land w hich is or w as occupied by a permanent structure, including the curtilage of the developed land and any associated infrastructure. Site planning history Have there been any previous applications for development on this land? What w as the outcome? Greenfield Brownfield Mixture Unknown 3/16/2015/FUL Erection of five detached dw ellings, change of use of land to school playing fields and associated w orks application validated 12 th September 2016 Aw aiting decision. Suitability Suitability 36

43 Is the current access adequate for the proposed development? If not, is there potential for access to be provided? Current access should be adequate for the proposed development. Is the site accessible? The site is adjacent to the A120 and bus stops. Provide details of site s connectivity Environmental Considerations Questions Assessment guidelines Observations and comments Is the site w ithin or adjacent to the follow ing policy or environmental designations: Green Belt Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) National Park European nature site SSSI Impact Risk Zone Site of Importance for Nature Conservation Site of Geological Importance Flood Zones 2 or 3 Yes but limited and should not affect the proposed development The access road has a small amount of Flood Zone 2. This should not impact the potential for development. Ecological value? Could the site be home to protected species such as bats, great crested new ts, badgers etc.? Landscape Is the site low, medium or high sensitivity in terms of landscape? Low sensitivity: site not visible or less visible, existing landscape is poor quality, existing features could be retained Medium sensitivity: Site has only moderate impact on landscape character (e.g. in built up area); High sensitivity: Development w ould significantly detract from the landscape and important features unlikely to be retained- mitigation not possible Agricultural Land Loss of high quality agricultural land (Grades 1,2 or 3a) Potential value Low sensitivity to development Loss of Grade 3 agricultural land Hedgerow s on the boundaries of the site could hold some ecological value. The site is located w ithin Area 93 (Hadhams Valley) of the East Herts Landscape Character Assessment SPD (2007) w hich concludes that it is a marked valley formation with a flat valley floor. It is edged by steep undulating slopes, some densely vegetation with little pasture. The main landscape strategy for the area is to conserve and strengthen. The view s in and out are limited due to hedgerow s except the adjacent dw ellings. Grade 3 Good to Moderate Agricultural Land. Heritage considerations Question Assessment Comments 37

44 guidelines Is the site w ithin or adjacent to one or more of the follow ing heritage designations or assets? Conservation area Scheduled monument Registered Park and Garden Registered Battlefield Listed building Know n archaeology Locally listed building There are no heritage assets w ithin or adjacent to the site. Community facilities and services Is the site, in general terms, close/accessible to local amenities such as (but not limited to): Tow n centre/local centre/shop Employment location Public transport School(s) Open space/recreation/ leisure facilities Health facilities Cycle route(s) Favourable located Observations and comments The site is in close proximity to the Little Hadham centre. Where a site is poorly located if > 800m, Moderately located if 400m to 800m, and favourable located if < 400m from services. Other key considerations Are there any Tree Preservation Orders on the site? What impact w ould development have on the site s habitats and biodiversity? Public Right of Way Existing social or community value (provide details) Is the site likely to be affected by any of the following? ne Unknow n Site is an open field w ith hedgerow s. Impact can be identified through a Habitat 1 Survey, and potential impacts mitigated. Yes Comments Ground Contamination Significant infrastructure crossing the site i.e. pow er lines/ pipe lines, or in close proximity to hazardous installations 38

45 Characteristics Characteristics w hich may affect development on the site: Topography: Flat/ plateau/ steep gradient Comments Slight slope but mostly flat Coalescence Development w ould result in neighbouring tow ns merging into one another. Scale and nature of development w ould be large enough to significantly change size and character of settlement 3.0. Availability Assessing the suitability of the site w ill give an indication of w hether the site has any constraints to development. It should consider aspects such as infrastructure, planning policy, local services, heritage and other considerations. Availability Yes Comments Is the site available for sale or development (if known)? Please provide supporting evidence. The site w as promoted in the Call for Sites so is assumed to be available. Are there any know n legal or ow nership problems such as unresolved multiple ow nerships, ransom strips, tenancies, or operational requirements of landow ners? Is there a know n time frame for availability? 0-5 /6-10 / years. Unknow n Any other comments? The site is w ithin the Policy Area of Rural Area Beyond the Green Belt in the Adopted East Herts Local Plan Second Review, This only allow s residential development as infill development w ithin the built up area of Little Hadham. As a result, residential development here w ould be in agreement to local policy Summary Assessing the suitability of the site w ill give an indication of w hether the site has any constraints to development. It should consider aspects such as infrastructure, planning policy, local services, heritage and other considerations. Conclusions Please tick a box The site is appropriate for allocation 39

46 This site has minor constraints The site has significant constraints The site is unsuitable for allocation Potential housing development capacity: 17 (based on SLAA conclusions) Key evidence (3-4 bullet points) for decision to accept or discount site. The site is considered suitable for allocation. The site has existing good access onto it and is located in an accessible location. There are no heritage assets w ithin or adjacent to the site, and limited environmental designations. The site is located close to existing services. 40

47 Site Assessment Proforma General information Site Reference / name 3 Site Address (or brief description of broad location) Current use Proposed use Gross area (Ha) Total area of the site in hectares SHLAA site reference (if applicable) Method of site identification (e.g. proposed by landow ner etc) Land adjacent to the River Ash Agriculture Residential 4.22 Forms a small part of 31/002 and is in all of 31/028 NP Call for Sites Context Is the site: Greenfield: land (farmland, or open space, that has not previously been developed) Brow nfield: Previously developed land w hich is or w as occupied by a permanent structure, including the curtilage of the developed land and any associated infrastructure. Site planning history Have there been any previous applications for development on this land? What w as the outcome? Greenfield Brownfield Mixture Unknown 3/17/0975/OUT Outline planning for the erection of up to 18 dw ellings on the southern half of the site, all matters reserved apart from access Validated 28 th April 2017 Aw aiting decision. Suitability Suitability Is the current access adequate for the proposed Suitable current access to the north of the site but only 41

48 development? If not, is there potential for access to be provided? Is the site accessible? PROW access in the south. The access in the south w ould need improving w hich w ould result in the removal of some hedgerow s. Site is 326m from the A120. Provide details of site s connectivity Environmental Considerations Questions Is the site w ithin or adjacent to the follow ing policy or environmental designations: Green Belt Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) National Park European nature site SSSI Impact Risk Zone Site of Importance for Nature Conservation Site of Geological Importance Flood Zones 2 or 3 Assessment guidelines Yes but limited and mitigation w ould not be needed for development on the w estern side of the site Observations and comments Eastern half of the site lies w ithin Flood Zone 2. Ecological value? Could the site be home to protected species such as bats, great crested new ts, badgers etc.? Potential value Potentially as hedgerow s surround most of the site. Landscape Is the site low, medium or high sensitivity in terms of landscape? Low sensitivity: site not visible or less visible, existing landscape is poor quality, existing features could be retained Medium sensitivity: Site has only moderate impact on landscape character (e.g. in built up area); High sensitivity: Development w ould significantly detract from the landscape and important features unlikely to be retained- mitigation not possible Medium sensitivity to development The site is located w ithin Area 93 (Hadhams Valley) of the East Herts Landscape Character Assessment SPD (2007) w hich concludes that it is a marked valley formation with a flat valley floor. It is edged by steep undulating slopes, some densely vegetation with little pasture. The main landscape strategy for the area is to conserve and strengthen. There are prominent view s out and into the site from the surrounding countryside and adjacent fields. These w ould need mitigation. Agricultural Land Loss of high quality agricultural land (Grades 1,2 or 3a) Loss of Grade 3 agricultural land Contains Grade 3 Good to Moderate Agricultural Land. Heritage considerations 42

49 Question Is the site w ithin or adjacent to one or more of the follow ing heritage designations or assets? Assessment guidelines Comments heritage assets are w ithin or adjacent to the site. Conservation area Scheduled monument Registered Park and Garden Registered Battlefield Listed building Know n archaeology Locally listed building Limited or no impact or no requirement for mitigation Community facilities and services Is the site, in general terms, close/accessible to local amenities such as (but not limited to): Tow n centre/local centre/shop Employment location Public transport School(s) Open space/recreation/ leisure facilities Health facilities Cycle route(s) Moderately located Observations and comments The site is moderately located with respect to the local centre of Little Hadham. Where a site is poorly located if > 800m, Moderately located if 400m to 800m, and favourable located if < 400m from services. Other key considerations Are there any Tree Preservation Orders on the site? What impact w ould development have on the site s habitats and biodiversity? Some TPOs along the w estern boundary Unknow n Some mature trees along the site boundaries. Site is an open field w ith hedgerow s. Impact can be identified through a Habitat 1 Survey, and potential impacts mitigated. Public Right of Way Yes A public right of w ay runs along the southern boundary and a bridlew ay runs along the northern boundary. Existing social or community value (provide details) Is the site likely to be affected by any of the following? Yes Comments Ground Contamination Significant infrastructure crossing 43

50 the site i.e. pow er lines/ pipe lines, or in close proximity to hazardous installations Characteristics Characteristics w hich may affect development on the site: Topography: Flat/ plateau/ steep gradient Coalescence: Development w ould result in neighbouring towns merging into one another. Scale and nature of development w ould be large enough to significantly change size and character of settlement Comments Slight slope rth-w est to South-east Size of the site is large but it w ould not significantly change the size and character of the settlement as less than half of the site cannot be built on due to flood risk Availability Assessing the suitability of the site w ill give an indication of w hether the site has any constraints to development. It should consider aspects such as infrastructure, planning policy, local services, heritage and other considerations. Availability Yes Comments Is the site available for sale or development (if know n)? Please provide supporting evidence. The site w as promoted in the Call for Sites so is assumed to be available. Are there any know n legal or ow nership problems such as unresolved multiple ow nerships, ransom strips, tenancies, or operational requirements of landow ners? Is there a know n time frame for availability? 0-5 /6-10 / years. Unknow n Any other comments? The site is w ithin the Policy Area of Rural Area Beyond the Green Belt in the Adopted East Herts Local Plan Second Review, This only allow s residential development as infill development w ithin the built up area of Little Hadham. As a result, residential development here w ould be contrary to the adopted policy. How ever in the emerging District Plan for East Herts, Policy GBR2 notes that development in the Rural Area Beyond the Green Belt can take place if it is development identified in an adopted Neighbourhood Plan or development brought forw ard under a Community Right to Build Order in an adopted Neighbourhood Plan. This indicates potential for Little Hadham Neighbourhood Plan to promote housing development on this site w ithin their Neighbourhood Plan Summary 44

51 Assessing the suitability of the site w ill give an indication of w hether the site has any constraints to development. It should consider aspects such as infrastructure, planning policy, local services, heritage and other considerations. Conclusions The site is appropriate for allocation This site has minor constraints The site has significant constraints The site is unsuitable for allocation Potential housing development capacity: 19 (based on SLAA conclusions) Key evidence (3-4 bullet points) for decision to accept or discount site. The w estern half of the site is considered appropriate for allocation subject to minor constraints. Current access w ould need improving. Current view s w ould need mitigation. There are no heritage assets w ithin or adjacent to the site and it is moderately located from the services and community facilities of Little Hadham. 45

52 Site Assessment Proforma General information Site Reference / name 4 Site Address (or brief description of broad location) Current use Proposed use Gross area (Ha) Total area of the site in hectares SHLAA site reference (if applicable) Method of site identification (e.g. proposed by landow ner etc) Savernake, land on A120 One residential house, w oodland and open space (garden) Residential 0.65 N/A NP Call for Sites Context Is the site: Greenfield: land (farmland, or open space, that has not previously been developed) Brow nfield: Previously developed land w hich is or w as occupied by a permanent structure, including the curtilage of the developed land and any associated infrastructure. Site planning history Have there been any previous applications for development on this land? What w as the outcome? Greenfield Brownfield Mixture Unknown ne Suitability Suitability Is the current access adequate for the proposed Current access off A120 is adequate for a small number of 46

53 development? If not, is there potential for access to be provided? Is the site accessible? residential dw ellings. Site sits along the A120, w hich is a w ell-connected road. Provide details of site s connectivity Environmental Considerations Questions Is the site w ithin or adjacent to the follow ing policy or environmental designations: Green Belt Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) National Park European nature site SSSI Impact Risk Zone Site of Importance for Nature Conservation Site of Geological Importance Flood Zones 2 or 3 Assessment guidelines Yes Observations and comments Site sits w ithin the Metropolitan Green Belt. Development is only allow ed if it is infill development, w hich this site w ould not constitute as. Ecological value? Could the site be home to protected species such as bats, great crested new ts, badgers etc.? Landscape Is the site low, medium or high sensitivity in terms of landscape? Low sensitivity: site not visible or less visible, existing landscape is poor quality, existing features could be retained Medium sensitivity: Site has only moderate impact on landscape character (e.g. in built up area); High sensitivity: Development w ould significantly detract from the landscape and important features unlikely to be retained- mitigation not possible Agricultural Land Loss of high quality agricultural land (Grades 1,2 or 3a) Potential value Low sensitivity to development Some loss of Grade 3 agricultural land Possibly as site includes hedgerow s and w oodland including a variety of mature trees. The site is located w ithin Area 150 (Hadhams Plateau) of the East Herts Landscape Character Assessment SPD (2007) w hich concludes that it is a plateau area with an open rural character and few roads or settlements. The main landscape strategy for the area is improve and conserve. Existing mature hedgerow s protect the view s onto open countryside from the site. View s are only possible from the existing dw elling s access to the road. These hedgerow s w ould need to be retained. Site w ithin Grade 3 (Good to Moderate) agricultural land. Heritage considerations Question Assessment Comments 47

54 guidelines Is the site w ithin or adjacent to one or more of the follow ing heritage designations or assets? Conservation area Scheduled monument Registered Park and Garden Registered Battlefield Listed building Know n archaeology Locally listed building There are no heritage assets or designations w ithin and adjacent to the site. Community facilities and services Is the site, in general terms, close/accessible to local amenities such as (but not limited to): Tow n centre/local centre/shop Employment location Public transport School(s) Open space/recreation/ leisure facilities Health facilities Cycle route(s) Poorly located Observations and comments The site is poorly located from any community facilities and services. Where a site is poorly located if > 800m, Moderately located if 400m to 800m, and favourably located if < 400m from services. Other key considerations Are there any Tree Preservation Orders on the site? ne But quite a few mature trees on site, some in centre of site. What impact w ould development have on the site s habitats and biodiversity? Public Right of Way Existing social or community value (provide details) Is the site likely to be affected by any of the following? Potential impact A Phase Habitat 1 survey w ould potentially have to be undertaken to determine if w orks w ould have an impact on the natural environment. Yes Comments Ground Contamination Significant infrastructure crossing the site i.e. pow er lines/ pipe lines, or in close proximity to hazardous installations 48

55 Characteristics Characteristics w hich may affect development on the site: Topography: Flat/ plateau/ steep gradient Coalescence Development w ould result in neighbouring tow ns merging into one another. Comments Mostly flat, some small slopes Scale and nature of development w ould be large enough to significantly change size and character of settlement 3.0. Availability Assessing the suitability of the site w ill give an indication of w hether the site has any constraints to development. It should consider aspects such as infrastructure, planning policy, local services, heritage and other considerations. Availability Yes Comments Is the site available for sale or development (if known)? Please provide supporting evidence. Submitted by landow ner in the Call for Sites Are there any know n legal or ow nership problems such as unresolved multiple ow nerships, ransom strips, tenancies, or operational requirements of landow ners? Is there a know n time frame for availability? 0-5 /6-10 / years. Any other comments? 4.0. Summary Assessing the suitability of the site w ill give an indication of w hether the site has any constraints to development. It should consider aspects such as infrastructure, planning policy, local services, heritage and other considerations. Conclusions Please tick a box The site is appropriate for allocation This site has minor constraints The site has significant constraints The site is unsuitable for allocation Potential housing development capacity: 0 49

56 Key evidence (3-4 bullet points) for decision to accept or discount site. The site is currently considered unsuitable for development due to it being w ithin the Green Belt. In future editions of the District Plan, the Neighbourhood Group could lobby for this site to be taken out of the Green Belt if they w ish for it to be developed. The site is more than 800m aw ay from any community facilities or services w hich is a major constraint. The site w ould need a Phase 1 Habitat survey undertaken to rule out w orks having an impact on the natural environment. 50

57 Site Assessment Proforma General information Site Reference / name 5 Site Address (or brief description of broad location) Current use Proposed use Gross area (Ha) Total area of the site in hectares SHLAA site reference (if applicable) Method of site identification (e.g. proposed by landow ner etc) Southacre, betw een the Ford to Bury Green Agriculture, farm buildings Unknow n 2.56 N/A NP Call for Sites Context Is the site: Greenfield: land (farmland, or open space, that has not previously been developed) Brow nfield: Previously developed land w hich is or w as occupied by a permanent structure, including the curtilage of the developed land and any associated infrastructure. Site planning history Have there been any previous applications for development on this land? What w as the outcome? Greenfield Brownfield Mixture Unknown 3/14/0050/FP Change of use from agricultural building to B1 (office & light industrial) & B8 (storage & distribution) Grant Planning Permission w ith Conditions. 3/14/0051/FP Erection of 5no. stables, tack room, store and hardstanding Grant Planning Permission w ith Conditions. 3/15/1427/FUL Erection of machinery story Grant Planning 51

58 Permission w ith Conditions.. Suitability Suitability Is the current access adequate for the proposed development? If not, is there potential for access to be provided? Current access is adequate for a small number of dw ellings. Is the site accessible? Provide details of site s connectivity Site accessed from a narrow country road, Acremore Street. 2.26km from the A120. Environmental Considerations Questions Is the site w ithin or adjacent to the follow ing policy or environmental designations: Green Belt Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) National Park European nature site SSSI Impact Risk Zone Site of Importance for Nature Conservation Site of Geological Importance Flood Zones 2 or 3 Ecological value? Could the site be home to protected species such as bats, great crested new ts, badgers etc.? Assessment guidelines Some possibility Observations and comments There are no environmental designations w ithin or adjacent to the site. There are hedgerow s along the boundary that could be home to protected species. Landscape Is the site low, medium or high sensitivity in terms of landscape? Low sensitivity: site not visible or less visible, existing landscape is poor quality, existing features could be retained Medium sensitivity: Site has only moderate impact on landscape character (e.g. in built up area); High sensitivity: Development w ould significantly detract from the landscape and important features unlikely to be retainedmitigation not possible Medium sensitivity to development The site is located w ithin Area 86 (Perry Green Uplands) of the East Herts Landscape Character Assessment SPD (2007) w hich concludes that it is open, with narrow sunken lanes and very extensive views out but limited views within. The main landscape strategy for the area is conserve and strengthen. Linear hamlets are a feature of this area but coalescence should be resisted. There are existing view s from the site into the adjacent fields. Some mitigation w ould be needed to protect these view s. 52

59 Agricultural Land Loss of high quality agricultural land (Grades 1,2 or 3a) Some loss of Grade 2 agricultural land Within Grade 2 (Very Good) agricultural land. Heritage considerations Question Is the site w ithin or adjacent to one or more of the follow ing heritage designations or assets? Conservation area Scheduled monument Registered Park and Garden Registered Battlefield Listed building Know n archaeology Locally listed building Assessment guidelines Some mitigation may be required for the listed buildings Comments The site is in close proximity to three listed buildings. Tw o are adjacent to the east of the site, and one to the north-w est of the site. Community facilities and services Is the site, in general terms, close/accessible to local amenities such as (but not limited to): Observations and comments Tow n centre/local centre/shop Employment location Public transport School(s) Open space/recreation/ leisure facilities Health facilities Cycle route(s) Poorly located The site is poorly located with respect to all listed community facilities and services. Where a site is poorly located if > 800m, Moderately located if 400m to 800m, and favourably located if < 400m from services. Other key considerations Are there any Tree Preservation Orders on the site? ne How ever there are a couple of mature trees on the edge of the site. What impact w ould development have on the site s habitats and biodiversity? Public Right of Way Existing social or community value (provide details) Is the site likely to be affected by any of the following? Unknow n A Phase Habitat 1 survey w ould need to be undertaken to determine if w orks w ould have an impact on the natural environment. Yes Comments Ground Contamination 53

60 Significant infrastructure crossing the site i.e. pow er lines/ pipe lines, or in close proximity to hazardous installations Characteristics Characteristics w hich may affect development on the site: Topography: Flat/ plateau/ steep gradient Coalescence Development w ould result in neighbouring tow ns merging into one another. Scale and nature of development w ould be large enough to significantly change size and character of settlement Comments Slope going up to site but site itself is fairly flat Site is of significant size and isolated from current development w hich could result in a change in size and character of Little Hadham and surrounding villages Availability Assessing the suitability of the site w ill give an indication of w hether the site has any constraints to development. It should consider aspects such as infrastructure, planning policy, local services, heritage and other considerations. Availability Yes Comments Is the site available for sale or development (if known)? Please provide supporting evidence. Landow ner promoted site through Call for Sites. Are there any know n legal or ow nership problems such as unresolved multiple ow nerships, ransom strips, tenancies, or operational requirements of landow ners? Is there a know n time frame for availability? 0-5 /6-10 / years. Any other comments? The site is w ithin the Policy Area of Rural Area Beyond the Green Belt in the Adopted East Herts Local Plan Second Review, This only allow s residential development as infill development w ithin the built up area of Little Hadham. As a result, residential development here w ould be contrary to the adopted policy. How ever in the emerging District Plan for East Herts, Policy GBR2 notes that development in the Rural Area Beyond the Green Belt can take place if it is development identified in an adopted Neighbourhood Plan or development brought forw ard under a Community Right to Build Order in an adopted Neighbourhood Plan. This indicates potential for Little Hadham Neighbourhood Plan to promote housing development on this site w ithin their 54

61 Neighbourhood Plan Summary Assessing the suitability of the site w ill give an indication of w hether the site has any constraints to development. It should consider aspects such as infrastructure, planning policy, local services, heritage and other considerations. Conclusions The site is appropriate for allocation This site has minor constraints The site has significant constraints Please tick a box The site is unsuitable for allocation Potential housing development capacity: 0 Key evidence (3-4 bullet points) for decision to accept or discount site. The site is not considered suitable for development due to significant constraints. Development of the site w ould result in a loss of Grade 2 Agricultural Land. Hedgerow or other screening w ould be needed to protect view s from the surrounding countryside. Development here w ould contradict the emerging District Plan s Policy VILL2. 55

62 Site Assessment Proforma General information Site Reference / name 6 Site Address (or brief description of broad location) Current use Proposed use Gross area (Ha) Total area of the site in hectares SHLAA site reference (if applicable) Method of site identification (e.g. proposed by landow ner etc) Acremore, betw een the Ford to Bury Green Farm buildings and agricultural land Residential 0.63 N/A NP Call for Sites Context Is the site: Greenfield: land (farmland, or open space, that has not previously been developed) Brow nfield: Previously developed land w hich is or w as occupied by a permanent structure, including the curtilage of the developed land and any associated infrastructure. Site planning history Have there been any previous applications for development on this land? What w as the outcome? Greenfield Brownfield Mixture Unknown 3/14/0043/FP Change of use from agricultural building to B1 (office & light industrial) & B8 (storage & distribution) Grant Planning Permission w ith Conditions. Suitability Suitability Is the current access adequate for the proposed development? If not, is there potential for access to be provided? If the existing buildings are retained, new access w ould be needed for further development on this site. Could possibly be provided through Site 5 if this site is developed. Is the site accessible? The site is 2.19km from the A120. Provide details of site s connectivity Environmental Considerations Questions Assessment guidelines Observations and comments 56

63 Is the site w ithin or adjacent to the follow ing policy or environmental designations: Green Belt Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) National Park European nature site SSSI Impact Risk Zone Site of Importance for Nature Conservation Site of Geological Importance Flood Zones 2 or 3 Ecological value? Could the site be home to protected species such as bats, great crested new ts, badgers etc.? Landscape Is the site low, medium or high sensitivity in terms of landscape? Low sensitivity: site not visible or less visible, existing landscape is poor quality, existing features could be retained Medium sensitivity: Site has only moderate impact on landscape character (e.g. in built up area); High sensitivity: Development w ould significantly detract from the landscape and important features unlikely to be retained- mitigation not possible Agricultural Land Loss of high quality agricultural land (Grades 1,2 or 3a) Possible value Medium sensitivity to development Some loss of Grade 2 agricultural land There are no environmental designations w ithin or adjacent to the site. Some trees on boundary of site could hold ecological value. The site is located w ithin Area 86 (Perry Green Uplands) of the East Herts Landscape Character Assessment SPD (2007) w hich concludes that it is open, with narrow sunken lanes and very extensive views out but limited views within. The main landscape strategy for the area is conserve and strengthen. Linear hamlets are a feature of this area but coalescence should be resisted. There are existing view s from the site into the adjacent fields. Some mitigation w ould be needed to protect these view s. Site is w ithin Grade 2 (Very Good) agricultural land. Heritage considerations Question Is the site w ithin or adjacent to one or more of the follow ing heritage designations or assets? Assessment guidelines Comments Conservation area Scheduled monument Registered Park and Garden Registered Battlefield Listed building Know n archaeology Locally listed building Some mitigation required The site boundary includes a listed building in the north-eastern corner. The site is adjacent to an area of archaeological significance. Community facilities and services 57

64 Is the site, in general terms, close/accessible to local amenities such as (but not limited to): Tow n centre/local centre/shop Employment location Public transport School(s) Open space/recreation/ leisure facilities Health facilities Cycle route(s) Where a site is poorly located if > 800m, Moderately located if 400m to 800m, and favourably located if < 400m from services. Poorly located Observations and comments The site is poorly located with respect to all listed community facilities and services. Other key considerations Are there any Tree Preservation Orders on the site? What impact w ould development have on the site s habitats and biodiversity? Public Right of Way Existing social or community value (provide details) Is the site likely to be affected by any of the following? ne Unknow n A Phase Habitat 1 survey w ould need to be undertaken to determine if w orks w ould have an impact on the natural environment. Yes Comments Ground Contamination Significant infrastructure crossing the site i.e. pow er lines/ pipe lines, or in close proximity to hazardous installations Characteristics Characteristics w hich may affect development on the site: Topography: Flat/ plateau/ steep gradient Coalescence Development w ould result in neighbouring tow ns merging into one another. Scale and nature of development w ould be large enough to Comments Flat 58

65 significantly change size and character of settlement 3.0. Availability Assessing the suitability of the site w ill give an indication of w hether the site has any constraints to development. It should consider aspects such as infrastructure, planning policy, local services, heritage and other considerations. Availability Yes Comments Is the site available for sale or development (if known)? Please provide supporting evidence. Submitted in the NP Call for Sites. Are there any know n legal or ow nership problems such as unresolved multiple ow nerships, ransom strips, tenancies, or operational requirements of landow ners? Unknow n Is there a know n time frame for availability? 0-5 /6-10 / years. Unknow n Any other comments? The site is w ithin the Policy Area of Rural Area Beyond the Green Belt in the Adopted East Herts Local Plan Second Review, This only allow s residential development as infill development w ithin the built up area of Little Hadham. As a result, residential development here w ould be contrary to the adopted policy. How ever in the emerging District Plan for East Herts, Policy GBR2 notes that development in the Rural Area Beyond the Green Belt can take place if it is development identified in an adopted Neighbourhood Plan or development brought forw ard under a Community Right to Build Order in an adopted Neighbourhood Plan. This indicates potential for Little Hadham Neighbourhood Plan to promote housing development on this site w ithin their Neighbourhood Plan Summary Assessing the suitability of the site w ill give an indication of w hether the site has any constraints to development. It should consider aspects such as infrastructure, planning policy, local services, heritage and other considerations. Conclusions The site is appropriate for allocation This site has minor constraints The site has significant constraints Please tick a box The site is unsuitable for allocation Potential housing development capacity: 0 Key evidence (3-4 bullet points) for decision to accept or discount site. The site is not considered suitable for development due to a significant constraint. Development here w ould be reliant on access 59

66 through Site 5, w hich is also deemed unsuitable for allocation. Development of the site w ould result in a loss of Grade 2 Agricultural Land. Hedgerow or other screening w ould be needed to protect view s onto the surrounding countryside. 60

67 Site Assessment Proforma General information Site Reference / name 7 Site Address (or brief description of broad location) Current use Proposed use Gross area (Ha) Total area of the site in hectares SHLAA site reference (if applicable) Method of site identification (e.g. proposed by landow ner etc) Former Glaxo Site in Bury Green Former industrial/office use, now derelict brow nfield land Residential 4.83 N/A NP Call for Sites Context Is the site: Greenfield: land (farmland, or open space, that has not previously been developed) Brow nfield: Previously developed land w hich is or w as occupied by a permanent structure, including the curtilage of the developed land and any associated infrastructure. Site planning history Have there been any previous applications for development on this land? What w as the outcome? Suitability Greenfield Brownfield Mixture Unknown 3/08/0593/FP Erection of 2 no. data centre buildings containing data handling computers, associated plant areas, technical support services and ancillary office area. 2 no external compounds, substation building and associated site w orks Grant Planning Permission w ith Conditions. Rest not relevant. Suitability Is the current access adequate for the proposed development? If not, is there potential for access to be provided? The site has current adequate access to it from Millfield Lane. Is the site accessible? The site is 1.18km from the A120. Provide details of site s connectivity Environmental Considerations Questions Assessment guidelines Observations and comments 61

68 Is the site w ithin or adjacent to the follow ing policy or environmental designations: Green Belt Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) National Park European nature site SSSI Impact Risk Zone Site of Importance for Nature Conservation Site of Geological Importance Flood Zones 2 or 3 Ecological value? Could the site be home to protected species such as bats, great crested new ts, badgers etc.? Yes Site is prone to flood risk; how ever site is mapped as an Area benefiting from flood defences by Environment Agency. Consultation is advised w ith the East Herts Local Planning Authority on development in an area benefiting from flood defences. evidence of ecological value on site. Landscape Is the site low, medium or high sensitivity in terms of landscape? Low sensitivity: site not visible or less visible, existing landscape is poor quality, existing features could be retained Medium sensitivity: Site has only moderate impact on landscape character (e.g. in built up area); High sensitivity: Development w ould significantly detract from the landscape and important features unlikely to be retained- mitigation not possible Low sensitivity to development The site is located w ithin Area 86 (Perry Green Uplands) of the East Herts Landscape Character Assessment SPD (2007) w hich concludes that it is open, with narrow sunken lanes and very extensive views out but limited views within. The main landscape strategy for the area is conserve and strengthen. Linear hamlets are a feature of this area but coalescence should be resisted. Access w as not attainable for this site but there w ere limited view s of the site from the boundaries so it is assumed there w ould be low sensitivity to development. Agricultural Land Loss of high quality agricultural land (Grades 1,2 or 3a) Loss of some Grade 2 and 3 agricultural land Contains Grade 3 agricultural land. Heritage considerations Question Is the site w ithin or adjacent to one or more of the follow ing heritage designations or assets? Conservation area Scheduled monument Registered Park and Garden Registered Battlefield Listed building Know n archaeology Assessment guidelines Some mitigation required for the listed building adjacent to the site. Comments The site is adjacent to a listed building along the site s southern boundary. 62

69 Locally listed building Community facilities and services Is the site, in general terms, close/accessible to local amenities such as (but not limited to): Tow n centre/local centre/shop Employment location Public transport School(s) Open space/recreation/ leisure facilities Health facilities Cycle route(s) Poorly located Observations and comments The site is poorly located with respect to all listed community facilities and services. Where a site is poorly located if > 800m, Moderately located if 400m to 800m, and favourably located if < 400m from services. Other key considerations Are there any Tree Preservation Orders on the site? What impact w ould development have on the site s habitats and biodiversity? ne ne Unlikely as the site is brow nfield. Public Right of Way Existing social or community value (provide details) Is the site likely to be affected by any of the following? Yes Comments Ground Contamination Potential for the site to be contaminated as it w as a former industrial/office site. Significant infrastructure crossing the site i.e. pow er lines/ pipe lines, or in close proximity to hazardous installations Characteristics Characteristics w hich may affect development on the site: Topography: Flat/ plateau/ steep gradient Coalescence: Development w ould result in neighbouring tow ns merging into one another. Scale and nature of development w ould be large enough to significantly change size and character of settlement Comments Unknow n due to not being able to access the site. Potentially as site is of a significant size. How ever the site is brow nfield land. 63

70 3.0. Availability Assessing the suitability of the site w ill give an indication of w hether the site has any constraints to development. It should consider aspects such as infrastructure, planning policy, local services, heritage and other considerations. Availability Yes Comments Is the site available for sale or development (if know n)? Please provide supporting evidence. Site w as submitted in the NP call for sites. Are there any know n legal or ow nership problems such as unresolved multiple ow nerships, ransom strips, tenancies, or operational requirements of landow ners? Unknow n. Is there a know n time frame for availability? 0-5 /6-10 / years. Unknow n. Any other comments? 4.0. Summary The site was allocated as a Major Developed Site in the adopted policy GBC4 from the 2007 Local Plan but is not allocated in emerging policy. Assessing the suitability of the site w ill give an indication of w hether the site has any constraints to development. It should consider aspects such as infrastructure, planning policy, local services, heritage and other considerations. Conclusions The site is appropriate for allocation This site has minor constraints Please tick a box The site has significant constraints The site is unsuitable for allocation Potential housing development capacity: 12 (based on 5 dw ellings per hectare, w hich is the average density of the existing built up area of Bury Green) Key evidence (3-4 bullet points) for decision to accept or discount site. The site is considered suitable for development but has minor constraints. Being derelict brow nfield land, the site w ould benefit from new development on it. New services and community facilities w ould be needed if a large amount of residential dw ellings w ere developed. Continued mitigation w ould be needed for the listed building adjacent to the site. 64

71 Site Assessment Proforma General information Site Reference / name 8 Site Address (or brief description of broad location) Current use Proposed use Gross area (Ha) Total area of the site in hectares SHLAA site reference (if applicable) Method of site identification (e.g. proposed by landow ner etc) Millfield Lane, Bury Green Agricultural fields, only used for grazing, and a small shed Unknow n 1.16 N/A NP Call for Sites Context Is the site: Greenfield: land (farmland, or open space, that has not previously been developed) Brow nfield: Previously developed land w hich is or w as occupied by a permanent structure, including the curtilage of the developed land and any associated infrastructure. Site planning history Have there been any previous applications for development on this land? What w as the outcome? Greenfield Brownfield Mixture Unknown ne Suitability Suitability Is the current access adequate for the proposed development? If not, is there potential for access to be provided? Current access is only available through a PROW. This w ould need to be improved or new access w ould need to be created off Millfield Lane to accommodate new 65

72 development. If new access w as created, this w ould result in the loss of mature hedgerow s. Is the site accessible? Provide details of site s connectivity Site is adjacent to Millfield Lane, w hich is a tight tw o w ay country lane. Site is 1.26km from the A120. Environmental Considerations Questions Is the site w ithin or adjacent to the follow ing policy or environmental designations: Green Belt Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) National Park European nature site SSSI Impact Risk Zone Site of Importance for Nature Conservation Site of Geological Importance Flood Zones 2 or 3 Assessment guidelines Observations and comments There are no environmental designations w ithin or adjacent to the site. Ecological value? Could the site be home to protected species such as bats, great crested new ts, badgers etc.? Landscape Is the site low, medium or high sensitivity in terms of landscape? Low sensitivity: site not visible or less visible, existing landscape is poor quality, existing features could be retained Medium sensitivity: Site has only moderate impact on landscape character (e.g. in built up area); High sensitivity: Development w ould significantly detract from the landscape and important features unlikely to be retained- mitigation not possible Agricultural Land Loss of high quality agricultural land (Grades 1,2 or 3a) Quite probable Low sensitivity to development Some loss The site is adjacent to a Wildlife Site. Therefore it could contain protected species. The site is located w ithin Area 86 (Perry Green Uplands) of the East Herts Landscape Character Assessment SPD (2007) w hich concludes that it is open, with narrow sunken lanes and very extensive views out but limited views within. The main landscape strategy for the area is conserve and strengthen. Linear hamlets are a feature of this area but coalescence should be resisted. Existing mature hedgerow s protect the view s onto open countryside from the site. These hedgerow s w ould need to be retained. There are view s onto existing dw ellings. The site is w ithin Grade 3 (Good to Moderate) agricultural land. 66

73 Heritage considerations Question Is the site w ithin or adjacent to one or more of the follow ing heritage designations or assets? Conservation area Scheduled monument Registered Park and Garden Registered Battlefield Listed building Know n archaeology Locally listed building Assessment guidelines Some impact to heritage assets and therefore some mitigation required Comments There is a listed building 0.04km to the south-east of the site. Hedgerow s and trees currently form a visual barrier for the listed building from the site. These w ould need to be maintained in the south-east corner to provide continuous mitigation if the site is developed. The site sits adjacent to Bury Green Conservation Area. Development adjacent to a conservation area has to comply w ith Policy BH6 from the adopted East Herts Local Plan, Community facilities and services Is the site, in general terms, close/accessible to local amenities such as (but not limited to): Tow n centre/local centre/shop Employment location Public transport School(s) Open space/recreation/ leisure facilities Health facilities Cycle route(s) Poorly located Observations and comments The site is poorly located with respect to community facilities and services. Where a site is poorly located if > 800m, Moderately located if 400m to 800m, and favourable located if < 400m from services. Other key considerations Are there any Tree Preservation Orders on the site? ne How ever there are mature trees going through the site to split it into tw o separate fields. What impact w ould development have on the site s habitats and biodiversity? Unknow n A Phase Habitat 1 survey w ould need to be undertaken to determine if w orks w ould have an impact on the natural environment. Public Right of Way Yes A PRoW runs along the northern boundary of the site. Existing social or community value (provide details) Is the site likely to be affected by any of the following? Yes Comments Ground Contamination 67

74 Significant infrastructure crossing the site i.e. pow er lines/ pipe lines, or in close proximity to hazardous installations Characteristics Characteristics w hich may affect development on the site: Topography: Flat/ plateau/ steep gradient Coalescence Development w ould result in neighbouring tow ns merging into one another. Scale and nature of development w ould be large enough to significantly change size and character of settlement Comments Mostly flat Falls in line w ith the linear development of Bury Green and w ould constitute as infill development Availability Assessing the suitability of the site w ill give an indication of w hether the site has any constraints to development. It should consider aspects such as infrastructure, planning policy, local services, heritage and other considerations. Availability Yes Comments Is the site available for sale or development (if known)? Please provide supporting evidence. Landow ner submitted the site in the call for sites. Are there any know n legal or ow nership problems such as unresolved multiple ow nerships, ransom strips, tenancies, or operational requirements of landow ners? Is there a know n time frame for availability? 0-5 /6-10 / years. Any other comments? The site is w ithin the Policy Area of Rural Area Beyond the Green Belt in the Adopted East Herts Local Plan Second Review, This only allow s residential development as infill development w ithin the built up area of Little Hadham. Furthermore in the emerging District Plan for East Herts, Policy GBR2 notes that development in the Rural Area Beyond the Green Belt can take place if it is development identified in an adopted Neighbourhood Plan or development brought forw ard under a Community Right to Build Order in an adopted Neighbourhood Plan. This indicates potential for Little Hadham Neighbourhood Plan to promote housing development on this site w ithin their 68

75 Neighbourhood Plan Summary Assessing the suitability of the site w ill give an indication of w hether the site has any constraints to development. It should consider aspects such as infrastructure, planning policy, local services, heritage and other considerations. Conclusions The site is appropriate for allocation This site has minor constraints Please tick a box The site has significant constraints The site is unsuitable for allocation Potential housing development capacity: 5 (based on 5 dw ellings per hectare, w hich is the average density of the existing built up area of Bury Green) Key evidence (3-4 bullet points) for decision to accept or discount site. The site is considered suitable for development but has some significant constraints. Access w ould need significant improvement to support new housing development. The site has no environmental designations and development w ould not negatively affect the landscape if existing hedgerow s are kept in place. Development should be sensitive to nearby heritage assets and Wildlife Site. 69

76 Site Assessment Proforma General information Site Reference / name 10 Site Address (or brief description of broad location) Current use Proposed use Gross area (Ha) Total area of the site in hectares SHLAA site reference (if applicable) Method of site identification (e.g. proposed by landow ner etc) Appleby, Cradle End Residential and fields used for rural uses Unknow n 0.46 N/A NP Call for Sites Context Is the site: Greenfield: land (farmland, or open space, that has not previously been developed) Brow nfield: Previously developed land w hich is or w as occupied by a permanent structure, including the curtilage of the developed land and any associated infrastructure. Site planning history Have there been any previous applications for development on this land? What w as the outcome? Greenfield Brownfield Mixture Unknown 3/13/1826/CL Proposed shed for the storage of garden machinery and stabling of domestic animals Grant Planning Permission. Suitability Suitability 70

77 Is the current access adequate for the proposed development? If not, is there potential for access to be provided? Access is available from a couple of single lanes. This should be adequate for a small number of dw ellings. Is the site accessible? Provide details of site s connectivity Site is accessible from a country lane. Site is 0.37km from the A120. Environmental Considerations Questions Is the site w ithin or adjacent to the follow ing policy or environmental designations: Green Belt Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) National Park European nature site SSSI Impact Risk Zone Site of Importance for Nature Conservation Site of Geological Importance Flood Zones 2 or 3 Assessment guidelines Observations and comments The site does not contain or is adjacent to any environmental designations. Ecological value? Could the site be home to protected species such as bats, great crested new ts, badgers etc.? Landscape Is the site low, medium or high sensitivity in terms of landscape? Low sensitivity: site not visible or less visible, existing landscape is poor quality, existing features could be retained Medium sensitivity: Site has only moderate impact on landscape character (e.g. in built up area); High sensitivity: Development w ould significantly detract from the landscape and important features unlikely to be retained- mitigation not possible Agricultural Land Loss of high quality agricultural land (Grades 1,2 or 3a) Potential Value Low sensitivity to development Loss of high quality agricultural land Possibly as site includes hedgerow s and mature trees on the boundaries. The site is located w ithin Area 86 (Perry Green Uplands) of the East Herts Landscape Character Assessment SPD (2007) w hich concludes that it is open, with narrow sunken lanes and very extensive views out but limited views within. The main landscape strategy for the area is conserve and strengthen. Linear hamlets are a feature of this area but coalescence should be resisted. Existing mature hedgerow s protect the view s onto open countryside from the site. These hedgerow s w ould need to be retained. The site is w ithin Grade 2 (Very Good) agricultural land. 71

78 Heritage considerations Question Is the site w ithin or adjacent to one or more of the follow ing heritage designations or assets? Conservation area Scheduled monument Registered Park and Garden Registered Battlefield Listed building Know n archaeology Locally listed building Assessment guidelines Some mitigation required for adjacent listed building Comments There is a listed building 0.02km to the south-east of the site. Current hedgerow s provide mitigation; these w ould need to be retained in future development of the site to provide continued mitigation. Community facilities and services Is the site, in general terms, close/accessible to local amenities such as (but not limited to): Tow n centre/local centre/shop Employment location Public transport School(s) Open space/recreation/ leisure facilities Health facilities Cycle route(s) Poorly located Observations and comments The site is not located in close proximity to any community facilities or services. Where a site is poorly located if > 800m, Moderately located if 400m to 800m, and favourably located if < 400m from services. Other key considerations Are there any Tree Preservation Orders on the site? ne How ever there are mature trees along the boundaries. What impact w ould development have on the site s habitats and biodiversity? Public Right of Way ne Existing social or community value (provide details) Is the site likely to be affected by any of the following? Yes Comments Ground Contamination Significant infrastructure crossing the site i.e. pow er lines/ pipe lines, or in close proximity to hazardous 72

79 installations Characteristics Characteristics w hich may affect development on the site: Topography: Flat/ plateau/ steep gradient Coalescence Development w ould result in neighbouring tow ns merging into one another. Scale and nature of development w ould be large enough to significantly change size and character of settlement Comments Flat 3.0. Availability Assessing the suitability of the site w ill give an indication of w hether the site has any constraints to development. It should consider aspects such as infrastructure, planning policy, local services, heritage and other considerations. Availability Yes Comments Is the site available for sale or development (if known)? Please provide supporting evidence. Landow ner submitted site in Call for Sites. Are there any know n legal or ow nership problems such as unresolved multiple ow nerships, ransom strips, tenancies, or operational requirements of landow ners? Is there a know n time frame for availability? 0-5 /6-10 / years. Any other comments? The site is w ithin the Policy Area of Rural Area Beyond the Green Belt in the Adopted East Herts Local Plan Second Review, This only allow s residential development as infill development w ithin the built up area of Little Hadham. As a result, residential development here w ould be contrary to the adopted policy. How ever in the emerging District Plan for East Herts, Policy GBR2 notes that development in the Rural Area Beyond the Green Belt can take place if it is development identified in an adopted Neighbourhood Plan or development brought forw ard under a Community Right to Build Order in an adopted Neighbourhood Plan. This indicates potential for Little Hadham Neighbourhood Plan to promote housing development on this site w ithin their Neighbourhood Plan Summary 73

80 Assessing the suitability of the site w ill give an indication of w hether the site has any constraints to development. It should consider aspects such as infrastructure, planning policy, local services, heritage and other considerations. Conclusions The site is appropriate for allocation This site has minor constraints Please tick a box The site has significant constraints The site is unsuitable for allocation Potential housing development capacity: 2 (based on 5 dw ellings per hectare, w hich is the average density of the existing built up area of Cradle End) Key evidence (3-4 bullet points) for decision to accept or discount site. The site is considered suitable for development but has some significant constraints. The development of the site w ould result in a loss of very good agricultural land. A limited number of dw ellings w ould be acceptable as the site is poorly located from community facilities and services. Existing hedgerow s w ould need to be maintained to provide continued mitigation for the nearby heritage asset and the view s into the surrounding area. 74

81 Site Assessment Proforma General information Site Reference / name 11 Site Address (or brief description of broad location) Current use Proposed use Gross area (Ha) Total area of the site in hectares SHLAA site reference (if applicable) Method of site identification (e.g. proposed by landow ner etc) Land adjacent to Bushes Croft, Cradle End SG11 2ER Garden, open space Unknow n 0.18 N/A NP Call for Sites Context Is the site: Greenfield: land (farmland, or open space, that has not previously been developed) Brow nfield: Previously developed land w hich is or w as occupied by a permanent structure, including the curtilage of the developed land and any associated infrastructure. Site planning history Have there been any previous applications for development on this land? What w as the outcome? Greenfield Brownfield Mixture Unknown 3/15/1722/FUL Proposed stable block incorporating a hay store and tack room Grant Planning Permission w ith conditions. Suitability Suitability Is the current access adequate for the proposed development? If not, is there potential for access Current access is adequate for a small number of dw ellings. 75

82 to be provided? Is the site accessible? Provide details of site s connectivity The site sits on a single lanew ay. It is 0.75km from the A120. Environmental Considerations Questions Is the site w ithin or adjacent to the follow ing policy or environmental designations: Green Belt Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) National Park European nature site SSSI Impact Risk Zone Site of Importance for Nature Conservation Site of Geological Importance Flood Zones 2 or 3 Assessment guidelines Yes Observations and comments Metropolitan Green Belt. Development is only allow ed if it is infill development, w hich this site w ould not constitute as. Ecological value? Could the site be home to protected species such as bats, great crested new ts, badgers etc.? Landscape Is the site low, medium or high sensitivity in terms of landscape? Low sensitivity: site not visible or less visible, existing landscape is poor quality, existing features could be retained Medium sensitivity: Site has only moderate impact on landscape character (e.g. in built up area); High sensitivity: Development w ould significantly detract from the landscape and important features unlikely to be retained- mitigation not possible Potential value Medium sensitivity to development There are hedgerow s along the boundary w hich could have potential for protected species. The site is located w ithin Area 86 (Perry Green Uplands) of the East Herts Landscape Character Assessment SPD (2007) w hich concludes that it is open, with narrow sunken lanes and very extensive views out but limited views within. The main landscape strategy for the area is conserve and strengthen. Linear hamlets are a feature of this area but coalescence should be resisted. There are view s of the site from the adjoining fields and nearby dw ellings, w hich w ould need mitigation. Agricultural Land Loss of high quality agricultural land (Grades 1,2 or 3a) Loss of high quality agricultural land Development here w ould contribute to coalescence betw een Cradle End and Bury Green, w hich should be avoided. Site is w ithin Grade 2 (Very Good) agricultural land. 76

83 Heritage considerations Question Is the site w ithin or adjacent to one or more of the follow ing heritage designations or assets? Assessment guidelines Comments Conservation area Scheduled monument Registered Park and Garden Registered Battlefield Listed building Know n archaeology Locally listed building The site does not contain or is adjacent to any heritage assets. Community facilities and services Is the site, in general terms, close/accessible to local amenities such as (but not limited to): Tow n centre/local centre/shop Employment location Public transport School(s) Open space/recreation/ leisure facilities Health facilities Cycle route(s) Poorly located Observations and comments The site is poorly located from community facilities and services. Where a site is poorly located if > 800m, Moderately located if 400m to 800m, and favourably located if < 400m from services. Other key considerations Are there any Tree Preservation Orders on the site? ne Some mature trees on one boundary of hedgerow s. What impact w ould development have on the site s habitats and biodiversity? Public Right of Way Existing social or community value (provide details) Is the site likely to be affected by any of the following? Unknow n Site is an open green space w ith hedgerow s. Impact can be identified through a Habitat 1 Survey, and potential impacts mitigated. Yes Comments Ground Contamination Significant infrastructure crossing the site i.e. pow er lines/ pipe lines, 77

84 or in close proximity to hazardous installations Characteristics Characteristics w hich may affect development on the site: Topography: Flat/ plateau/ steep gradient Coalescence: Development w ould result in neighbouring towns merging into one another. Comments Slight slope up onto site, but site itself is mostly flat Yes the site w ould contribute to coalescence betw een Cradle End and Bury Green Scale and nature of development w ould be large enough to significantly change size and character of settlement 3.0. Availability Assessing the suitability of the site w ill give an indication of w hether the site has any constraints to development. It should consider aspects such as infrastructure, planning policy, local services, heritage and other considerations. Availability Yes Comments Is the site available for sale or development (if known)? Please provide supporting evidence. Landow ner submitted site in Call for Sites Are there any know n legal or ow nership problems such as unresolved multiple ow nerships, ransom strips, tenancies, or operational requirements of landow ners? Is there a know n time frame for availability? 0-5 /6-10 / years. Any other comments? 4.0. Summary Assessing the suitability of the site w ill give an indication of w hether the site has any constraints to development. It should consider aspects such as infrastructure, planning policy, local services, heritage and other considerations. Conclusions The site is appropriate for allocation This site has minor constraints The site has significant constraints Please tick a box The site is unsuitable for allocation Potential housing development capacity: 0 Key evidence (3-4 bullet points) for decision to accept The site is unsuitable for allocation because: 78

85 or discount site. 1. It is w ithin the Metropolitan Green Belt, development here is only allow ed if it is infill development, w hich this site does not constitute as. 2. It w ould help contribute to coalescence of development betw een Cradle End and Bury Green, w hich is recommended to be avoided in the Landscape Character Assessment SPD (2007) for Character Area

86 Site Assessment Proforma General information Site Reference / name 12 Site Address (or brief description of broad location) Current use Proposed use Gross area (Ha) Total area of the site in hectares SHLAA site reference (if applicable) Method of site identification (e.g. proposed by landow ner etc) Land adjacent to Ashmeads, The Ford Immature w oodland Residential 0.63 N/A NP Call for Sites Context Is the site: Greenfield: land (farmland, or open space, that has not previously been developed) Brow nfield: Previously developed land w hich is or w as occupied by a permanent structure, including the curtilage of the developed land and any associated infrastructure. Site planning history Have there been any previous applications for development on this land? What w as the outcome? Greenfield Brownfield Mixture Unknown ne Suitability Suitability Is the current access adequate for the proposed Site sits on the road edge of the B1004. Access from the 80

87 development? If not, is there potential for access to be provided? Is the site accessible? Provide details of site s connectivity road w ould need to be created for potential dw ellings as it does not currently exist. Site is on the B1004. The site is 1.31km aw ay from the A120. Environmental Considerations Questions Is the site w ithin or adjacent to the follow ing policy or environmental designations: Green Belt Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) National Park European nature site SSSI Impact Risk Zone Site of Importance for Nature Conservation Site of Geological Importance Flood Zones 2 or 3 Assessment guidelines Yes Observations and comments The River Ash flow s along the north-w estern boundary of the site. This results in majority of the northern half of the site being w ithin Flood Zone 2 and 3. Ecological value? Could the site be home to protected species such as bats, great crested new ts, badgers etc.? Landscape Is the site low, medium or high sensitivity in terms of landscape? Low sensitivity: site not visible or less visible, existing landscape is poor quality, existing features could be retained Medium sensitivity: Site has only moderate impact on landscape character (e.g. in built up area); High sensitivity: Development w ould significantly detract from the landscape and important features unlikely to be retained- mitigation not possible Agricultural Land Loss of high quality agricultural land (Grades 1,2 or 3a) Yes Low sensitivity to development Some loss of moderate agricultural land The site is extremely vegetated w ith a lot of bush and young trees. The site is located w ithin Area 93 (Hadhams Valley) of the East Herts Landscape Character Assessment SPD (2007) w hich concludes that it is a marked valley formation with a flat valley floor. It is edged by steep undulating slopes, some densely vegetation with little pasture. The main landscape strategy for the area is to conserve and strengthen. There are some view s from the site onto nearby residential. Site is w ithin Grade 3 (Good to moderate) agricultural land. Heritage considerations Question Assessment guidelines Comments Is the site w ithin or adjacent to one or Yes The site is in close proximity to a number 81

88 more of the follow ing heritage designations or assets? Conservation area Scheduled monument Registered Park and Garden Registered Battlefield Listed building Know n archaeology Locally listed building of listed buildings at the junction of Ford Hill and the B1004. Mitigation w ould be needed for any development in the northeastern part of the site. The site is w ithin Hadham Ford Conservation Area. Development w ithin a conservation area has to comply w ith Policy BH6 from the adopted East Herts Local Plan, Community facilities and services Is the site, in general terms, close/accessible to local amenities such as (but not limited to): Tow n centre/local centre/shop Employment location Public transport School(s) Open space/recreation/ leisure facilities Health facilities Cycle route(s) Favourably located Observations and comments The site is in close proximity to the community facilities and services located at Hadham Ford. Where a site is poorly located if > 800m, Moderately located if 400m to 800m, and favourably located if < 400m from services. Other key considerations Are there any Tree Preservation Orders on the site? What impact w ould development have on the site s habitats and biodiversity? Public Right of Way Existing social or community value (provide details) Is the site likely to be affected by any of the following? ne Unknow n A Phase Habitat 1 survey w ould need to be undertaken to determine if w orks w ould have an impact on the natural environment. Yes Comments Ground Contamination Significant infrastructure crossing the site i.e. pow er lines/ pipe lines, or in close proximity to hazardous installations Characteristics 82

89 Characteristics w hich may affect development on the site: Topography: Flat/ plateau/ steep gradient Coalescence: Development w ould result in neighbouring towns merging into one another. Comments Sloped dow nw ards from the road Scale and nature of development w ould be large enough to significantly change size and character of settlement 3.0. Availability Assessing the suitability of the site w ill give an indication of w hether the site has any constraints to development. It should consider aspects such as infrastructure, planning policy, local services, heritage and other considerations. Availability Yes Comments Is the site available for sale or development (if know n)? Please provide supporting evidence. Landow ner submitted site in Call for Sites Are there any know n legal or ow nership problems such as unresolved multiple ow nerships, ransom strips, tenancies, or operational requirements of landow ners? Is there a know n time frame for availability? 0-5 /6-10 / years. Any other comments? 4.0. Summary Assessing the suitability of the site w ill give an indication of w hether the site has any constraints to development. It should consider aspects such as infrastructure, planning policy, local services, heritage and other considerations. Conclusions The site is appropriate for allocation This site has minor constraints The site has significant constraints The site is unsuitable for allocation Potential housing development capacity: 4 (taken from Call for Sites) Key evidence (3-4 bullet points) for decision to accept or discount site. The site is considered suitable for development but has significant constraints. Only the part of the site that is not w ithin Flood Zone 2 or 3 is deemed suitable. Substantive mitigation w ould be needed for any ecology on site and the sloping topography. Screening w ould be needed from the adjacent heritage assets. The site is favourably located to community facilities and services. 83

90 Site Assessment Proforma General information Site Reference / name 15 Site Address (or brief description of broad location) Current use Proposed use Gross area (Ha) Total area of the site in hectares SHLAA site reference (if applicable) Method of site identification (e.g. proposed by landow ner etc) Albury Road SG11 2DW Dw ellings and gardens Residential 0.3 N/A NP Call for Sites Context Is the site: Greenfield: land (farmland, or open space, that has not previously been developed) Brow nfield: Previously developed land w hich is or w as occupied by a permanent structure, including the curtilage of the developed land and any associated infrastructure. Site planning history Have there been any previous applications for development on this land? What w as the outcome? Greenfield Brownfield Mixture Unknown ne relevant. Suitability Suitability Is the current access adequate for the proposed Access restricted by the tw o existing properties. Unsure if 84

91 development? If not, is there potential for access to be provided? Is the site accessible? Provide details of site s connectivity there is potential for access to be provided. The site is on Albury Road w hich is a tw o w ay B road. The A120 is 0.21km to the south of the site. Environmental Considerations Questions Is the site w ithin or adjacent to the follow ing policy or environmental designations: Green Belt Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) National Park European nature site SSSI Impact Risk Zone Site of Importance for Nature Conservation Site of Geological Importance Flood Zones 2 or 3 Assessment guidelines Observations and comments The site is not w ithin or adjacent to any environmental designations. Ecological value? Could the site be home to protected species such as bats, great crested new ts, badgers etc.? Landscape Is the site low, medium or high sensitivity in terms of landscape? Low sensitivity: site not visible or less visible, existing landscape is poor quality, existing features could be retained Medium sensitivity: Site has only moderate impact on landscape character (e.g. in built up area); High sensitivity: Development w ould significantly detract from the landscape and important features unlikely to be retained- mitigation not possible Agricultural Land Loss of high quality agricultural land (Grades 1,2 or 3a) Potential value Low sensitivity to development Some loss of high quality agricultural land The site contains some trees that may hold some ecological value. The site is located w ithin Area 93 (Hadhams Valley) of the East Herts Landscape Character Assessment SPD (2007) w hich concludes that it is a marked valley formation with a flat valley floor. It is edged by steep undulating slopes, some densely vegetation with little pasture. The main landscape strategy for the area is to conserve and strengthen. All view s of the site are hidden by existing features, including hedges and existing dw ellings on site. The site is w ithin Grade 3 (Good to Moderate) agricultural land. Heritage considerations Question Assessment guidelines Comments 85

92 Is the site w ithin or adjacent to one or more of the follow ing heritage designations or assets? Conservation area Scheduled monument Registered Park and Garden Registered Battlefield Listed building Know n archaeology Locally listed building Some impact, and/or mitigation possible There are tw o listed buildings opposite on Albury Road. The site is adjacent to Little Hadham Conservation Area. The southern half of the site sits w ithin an Area of Archaeological Significance. Community facilities and services Is the site, in general terms, close/accessible to local amenities such as (but not limited to): Tow n centre/local centre/shop Employment location Public transport School(s) Open space/recreation/ leisure facilities Health facilities Cycle route(s) Favourably located Observations and comments The site is favourably located from the community facilities and services located in Little Hadham. Where a site is poorly located if > 800m, Moderately located if 400m to 800m, and favourably located if < 400m from services. Other key considerations Are there any Tree Preservation Orders on the site? What impact w ould development have on the site s habitats and biodiversity? Public Right of Way Existing social or community value (provide details) Is the site likely to be affected by any of the following? ne Unknow n A Phase Habitat 1 survey w ould need to be undertaken to determine if w orks w ould have an impact on the natural environment. Yes Comments Ground Contamination Significant infrastructure crossing the site i.e. pow er lines/ pipe lines, or in close proximity to hazardous installations Characteristics 86

93 Characteristics w hich may affect development on the site: Topography: Flat/ plateau/ steep gradient Coalescence: Development w ould result in neighbouring towns merging into one another. Comments Slope up to site, unsure of topography of the rest of the site due to lack of access Scale and nature of development w ould be large enough to significantly change size and character of settlement 3.0. Availability Assessing the suitability of the site w ill give an indication of w hether the site has any constraints to development. It should consider aspects such as infrastructure, planning policy, local services, heritage and other considerations. Availability Yes Comments Is the site available for sale or development (if known)? Please provide supporting evidence. The landow ner submitted the site in the Call for Sites. Are there any know n legal or ow nership problems such as unresolved multiple ow nerships, ransom strips, tenancies, or operational requirements of landow ners? Is there a know n time frame for availability? 0-5 /6-10 / years. Any other comments? The site is w ithin the Policy Area of Rural Area Beyond the Green Belt in the Adopted East Herts Local Plan Second Review, This only allow s residential development as infill development w ithin the built up area of Little Hadham. As a result, residential development here w ould be contrary to the adopted policy. How ever in the emerging District Plan for East Herts, Policy GBR2 notes that development in the Rural Area Beyond the Green Belt can take place if it is development identified in an adopted Neighbourhood Plan or development brought forw ard under a Community Right to Build Order in an adopted Neighbourhood Plan. This indicates potential for Little Hadham Neighbourhood Plan to promote housing development on this site w ithin their Neighbourhood Plan Summary Assessing the suitability of the site w ill give an indication of w hether the site has any constraints to development. It should consider aspects such as infrastructure, planning policy, local services, heritage and other considerations. Conclusions Please tick a box 87

94 The site is appropriate for allocation This site has minor constraints The site has significant constraints The site is unsuitable for allocation Potential housing development capacity: 0 Key evidence (3-4 bullet points) for decision to accept or discount site. The site is considered unlikely to be suitable for allocation. The current access of the site is considered unsuitable w ith no potential for improvement w ith the existing dw ellings. 88

95 Site Assessment Proforma General information Site Reference / name 16 Site Address (or brief description of broad location) Land at Church End Farm (a) Current use Proposed use Gross area (Ha) Total area of the site in hectares SHLAA site reference (if applicable) Method of site identification (e.g. proposed by landow ner etc) Agriculture fields Residential /022 (rejected but south-w estern part of site is being assessed as believe this section of the site does not match the SLAA conclusions). NP Call for Sites Context Is the site: Greenfield: land (farmland, or open space, that has not previously been developed) Brow nfield: Previously developed land w hich is or w as occupied by a permanent structure, including the curtilage of the developed land and any associated infrastructure. Site planning history Have there been any previous applications for development on this land? What w as the outcome? Greenfield Brownfield Mixture Unknown ne Suitability Suitability 89