HarrisLane2025

Your name

Your email

First Line of Address

Your Postcode

Subject

Message (Edit just as you wish)
Dear Sir/Madam Subject: 25/1347/FUL-Erection of 38 dwellings (including 50% affordable homes) with associated parking, infrastructure, landscaping and open space, and access from Harris Lane.- Land Adjacent And To The Rear Of 52 Harris Lane Shenley Hertfordshire Dear Sir/Madam I wish to object to planning application 25/1347/FUL. for the reasons below This objection should be taken as my separate and individual representation in accordance with your agreed policy and procedures. 1. Conflict with Hertsmere Council Planning Policies, NPPF paras 110, 115, 148, 153-156, 159, 193, Appeal Decision 3311193 and the HBC Draft Local Plan. This site in undeveloped green field green belt outside the village envelope whose development been proposed and rejected multiple times: by over 2,000 residents’ objections, by the HBC Planning Committee and by the Planning Inspectorate. It was excluded from the 2023 Draft Local Plan as it is not compatible with the preservation of the rural and village character of Shenley which is a stated objective of the ‘settlement based’ Draft Hertsmere Local Plan. It does not meet Hertsmere Council’s Affordable housing polices, these units are not integrated nor are they tenure blind. In the recent pre-application, community consultation, 77% of people who responded objected or strongly objected to this latest proposal – both in principle and to many aspects of the execution. These objections have not been fully reported or addressed in the Statement of Community Involvement and then in the plans submitted. 2. Not compliant with the ‘golden rules’ on additional Infrastructure and green space No meaningful betterment accordance with national guidance to Shenley’s infrastructure is presented over and above the compulsory Section 106 mitigations. The public space offered does not meet the government guidance: It does not ‘meet the needs of the community’ nor is it accessible through sustainable infrastructure ‘such as footpaths and bridleways’. The community expressed these concerns in the pre-application feedback and these have not been reported in the Statement of Community Involvement or addressed in the final design. As identified in this feedback, to be meaningful additional green space, it would need to be separate and additional to necessary infrastructure mitigations and at the front of the site to connect to the existing amenities of Harris Lane and surrounding footpaths. 3. Contravention of Shenley Neighbourhood Plan policies SH1, SH5, SH6 and design codes and substantial harm to rural character of Shenley through loss of valued open views across rolling green belt landscape, noted by the Planning Inspector in Appeal case 3311193. Examples of conflicts include: Inappropriate housing mix and design, with 60% of the units at 2.5 stories and 30% in apartment blocks. Inappropriate density of 22 homes/ha compared to 16 homes/ha density in the adjacent Harris Lane and Anderson Roads. Loss of landscape visual amenity due to massing of the housing at the top of the site, leading to a visual effect of 30 homes/ha density spoiling both inward and outward views. This ‘urban’ density is out of keeping with this rural part of the village and will be visible from the playing fields as well as Harris Lane and footpaths in and around Shenley. This development cannot be delivered without contravening the majority of the key policy objectives and design codes of the SNP which was supported by 96% at referendum. It would cause irreparable harm to amenity value, peace, tranquility and rural setting of Harris Lane, the playing fields and the rural edge of Shenley village 4. Not a sustainable location with insufficient consideration of transport, highways and parking considerations Contrary to the claims made by the developer, Shenley is not a sustainable location. It is well known that bus services are infrequent and unreliable. There are very limited employment and local amenities. The overall amount of parking on the development is insufficient and is weighted strongly towards the larger 4-bedroom units. Inevitably, parking will spill over onto Harris Lane and impact users of the playing fields including children and the elderly. In addition the increase in traffic from the Grange and (potentially) Longview sites the development will cause a 900% increase in traffic opposite the playing fields, endangering park users and pedestrians. No suitable mitigations are proposed. 5. Significant harm to local biodiversity contrary to the Shenley Neighbourhood Plan (SH1) an Planning Guidance 008 Reference ID: 74-008-20240214 The development proposes the destruction of established trees and hedgerows. The 60% reduction in on-site biodiversity identified by developer will not be restored on site but be offset on a site several miles outside of Shenley village. Harris Lane is the gateway to Mimms and Rectory Lane and is part of the conservation setting of Shenley. As such, it is a vital part of the rural character of Shenley – a character which derives, in the heart of the village, from the absence of noise, the absence of danger from traffic and the absence of the built environment. This application would remove all these benefits currently enjoyed and deliver no genuine additional public benefit. I therefore respectfully request that the Council refuse this application. Yours sincerely

I agree to the Privacy Policy