Agenda item

Outline application: demolition of existing development and redevelopment of the Site, including the construction of up to 333 dwellings (Use Class C3) of which 50% affordable housing, 66 bed Care Home (Use Class C2), Medical Centre (Use Class E (e)), Local Centre [containing Retail (Use Class E (a-c)), Community Facilities (use Class F2) and Cafe (Use Class E(a))] and associated play space, parking and associated infrastructure. New vehicular access onto Shepherds Lane and pedestrian and cycle accesses onto Shepherds Lane and Berry Lane, bus stop, bike station,  landscaping, pedestrian / cycleway access routes, green infrastructure including community amenity space, allotments, play areas, outdoor gym trail / equipment and associated infrastructure including sustainable urban drainage systems (all matters reserved except for access) at Catlips Farm, Berry Lane, Chorleywood.

Recommendation:

(1)   That Members agree for officers to arrange a site visit prior to this application being presented to Planning Committee for a decision; and

(2)   That the Committee notes the report and is invited to make general comments with regard to the material planning issues raised by the application.

The Committee considered an issues report prior to outline permission being sought for the demolition of existing development and redevelopment of the Site, including the construction of up to 333 dwellings (Use Class C3) of which 50% affordable housing, 66 bed Care Home (Use Class C2), Medical Centre (Use Class E (e)), Local Centre [containing Retail (Use Class E (a-c)), Community Facilities (use Class F2) and Cafe (Use Class E(a))] and associated play space, parking and associated infrastructure. New vehicular access onto Shepherds Lane and pedestrian and cycle accesses onto Shepherds Lane and Berry Lane, bus stop, bike station,  landscaping, pedestrian / cycleway access routes, green infrastructure including community amenity space, allotments, play areas, outdoor gym trail / equipment and associated infrastructure including sustainable urban drainage systems (all matters reserved except for access) at Catlips Farm, Berry Lane, Chorleywood.

The Planning Officer reminded those present that no decision was being sought at this stage; Members were invited to note and comment on the material planning issues raised by the application and consider undertaking a site visit.

The Planning Officer provided an update that since publication of the report, further information had been received from the applicant in respect of an updated ecology assessment, Biodiversity Net Gain statement, updated transport assessment and response in respect of landscape and heritage.  These were being reviewed by the consultees to the application.

Additionally, two further objection letters had been received from members of the public.  These had not raised any new matters which were not already included in the report.

Finally, a legal opinion had been sought by Chorleywood Parish Council and this had been shared with Planning Officers.  However, it had not yet been fully considered and was not addressed within the report.

Parish Councillor Jon Bishop of Chorleywood Parish Council spoke on the item.

The developer spoke in favour of the item.

Points raised by the speaker against the item included that further information was needed in the Green Belt section of the report, particularly in relation to the site’s role within the gap between Rickmansworth and Chorleywood, and visual separation and the measurements which had underpinned the officers’ opinion in relation to both of these matters; and the unsustainability of the site.

Points raised by the speaker in favour of the item included that the proposal respected the area whilst helping with the severe housing shortage; it would provide up to 333 homes of which 167 would be affordable housing, as well as a care home, medical centre, community uses, open space, bus service contribution and education service contribution.  The proposal would not change the identity of Chorleywood but would give more people the opportunity to become part of it.

Committee Members asked questions about the detail of the application which were responded to by officers.  The Committee’s discussions, comments and questions included the following:

·      Committee Members supported having a site visit before the application came to the Committee later in the year.  [Note: following the meeting it was agreed that date for the site visit should be decided in due course, once there was a clearer idea of the timescale for the application].  In particular Members wished to understand the walking routes from the site along Common Gate Road and Berry Lane, and considered that it would be helpful if the applicant and the Planning Officer could provide more detail about the distance and route to the Shepherd’s Lane side of the site and to the station.

·      The fact that Chorleywood was commonly referred to as Chorleywood Village and held an annual Village Day did not necessarily mean that it should be defined as a village in the settlement hierarchy.  It would be helpful to have advice on whether Chorleywood was a village or a town, to assist Committee Members in forming a view at the substantive decision stage.  It would also be helpful to have an exploration as to the weight which needed to be given to the Council’s designation in the emerging Local Plan as an area of importance to the Green Belt, as this needed to be considered as a material consideration (albeit that the emerging Local Plan carried very limited weight).

·      Clarity was requested with regard to the financial contribution towards a possible new primary school, which was shown in the report to be c£6m but was stated by the applicant to be £11m.  Clarity was also requested with regard to whether the financial contribution towards healthcare facilities set out at paragraph 7.19.6 of the report was to be used to fund the proposed medical centre, or whether it would be required in addition.

·      The Woodland Trust had commented that there was a need to provide clear plans showing proposed works in relation to the ancient woodland and further information in relation to this was requested to be included.

·      How long would the bus routes be funded for, and what would the impact on the highways network if they were subsequently withdrawn?

·      Shepherd’s Land and Berry Lane are single track, narrow country lanes with no pavements or streetlights.  How will the influx of traffic from 333 homes and a care home be able to safely navigate the highways infrastructure?

·      Will the Maple Cross sewage treatment works be able to cope with a development of this size?

·      Is the site sustainable, given the access issues and the nature of the roads which would serve the development?

·      There are a number of objections which remain outstanding.

·      Would the stated solutions to the difficulty in walking to the site actually amount to a positive contribution and respond to what the planning authority would wish to see?  If not, could they be given lesser weight?

·      More information was requested to be included in the report in relation to the local school provision and capacity.  Additionally, more information was requested in relation to all of the infrastructure areas which were already under pressure, namely schools, healthcare, drainage and transport.

By general assent the Committee noted the report and agreed to undertake a site visit.

RESOLVED:

That:

(1)   Members agree for officers to arrange a site visit prior to this application being presented to Planning Committee for a decision; and

(2)   the Committee notes the report and makes general comments with regard to the material planning issues raised by the application as set out above.