Author Topic: Hawkshead Road Car Boot Sale Field  (Read 136238 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline jet

  • Opinions on everything
  • *****
  • Posts: 1285
  • Gender: Male
Re: 20 acre field
« Reply #30 on: December 30, 2003, 05:04:09 pm »
We knew this was likely to happen and its the thin edge of the wedge which will start joining BP to PB.
We must act to prevent this flagrant abuse of the regulations which were made to protect the green belt.
However objecting is not enough, it is neccasary to quote the law substanciating the objection and if someone could confirm this my objection will be on its way soon after.
Do we want this area turned into Stevenage?
regards,
jet
If there are ponds on the site, do these not constitute SSIs, if there are newts these have protection in law to conserve their habitat.
 

Offline Bob Horrocks

  • Opinions on everything
  • *****
  • Posts: 1555
  • Gender: Male
  • Expertises:
  • Green Belt
  • Parish Council
Re: 20 acre field
« Reply #31 on: December 30, 2003, 07:25:43 pm »
Agreed.  The technical points are in my report on this site, see main page for link, and on www.greenbeltsociety.org.uk. Get writing to Welwyn Hatfield now before it is too late!!!!!  Don't leave it to the New Year.

The main point is that the proposals are 'inappropriate' in the Green Belt, as defined in para 3.4 of PPG2.  The 'very special circumstances' given in the application do not add up to a hill of beans (non-technical but plain English).  References to better land management, rare breed cattle or sheep, and a new public footpath are all red herrings.  The cattle/sheep will not make a profit and do not need 24/7 on-site management.  Who would use the footpath rather than the existing one from near Folly Arch across the fields?  PPG7 (countryside) does not override PPG2 (Green Belt) so all references to PPG7 are irrelevant.

Whew, that feels better!
Happy New Year to one and all

Offline Bob Horrocks

  • Opinions on everything
  • *****
  • Posts: 1555
  • Gender: Male
  • Expertises:
  • Green Belt
  • Parish Council
Re: 20 acre field
« Reply #32 on: December 30, 2003, 07:28:42 pm »
I forgot about the ponds.  They dried up this summer, are very silted up and are not SSIs.  The proposals would vastly improve the ponds but this is another red herring.

Offline Bob Horrocks

  • Opinions on everything
  • *****
  • Posts: 1555
  • Gender: Male
  • Expertises:
  • Green Belt
  • Parish Council
Re: 20 acre field
« Reply #33 on: December 31, 2003, 07:43:36 pm »
By co-incidence the property section of the Daily Telegraph issued Sat 27 Dec dealt with a query similar to Friday Grove.  Someone wanted to build a log cabin in open countryside as a holiday home but found that local authorities were unwilling to permit anything other that a dwelling for agricultural workers.  

The expert’s reply was that many people would like to live in open countryside and, if they were allowed to do so, there would be little open countryside left. That is one reason why Planning Acts were passed 60 years ago.  The expert did not know of authorities that permit new houses in open country, except for housing workers employed in the countryside.  

The expert did not mention it but planning policies are even more against new houses in land designed as Green Belt.

John_fraser

  • Guest
Re: 20 acre field
« Reply #34 on: December 31, 2003, 08:24:22 pm »
I do wonder if this is a Trojan Horse. For this house to gain permission there would have to be a change in the use of the land from agricultural. A single house will cause less objections than several, but would it be possible between gaining permission and commencing the build, to apply to build a number of houses instead of just one? Would this be easier once the land is no longer classed as agricultural?
 

Offline Editor

  • David Brewer
  • Administrator
  • Opinions on everything
  • *****
  • Posts: 8888
  • Thanked: 137 times
  • Gender: Male
    • Media Helping Media
  • Expertises:
  • Media consultant
  • Journalism trainer
  • Walking
  • Real ale
Re: 20 acre field
« Reply #35 on: December 31, 2003, 08:24:32 pm »
Bob,

The article you refer to is also online in the Telegraph's Property section.

Click here to read the article

I have copied the key paragraphs in the piece (below) .

Quote

John Winter writes:A great number of English people would like to live in open countryside, and, if they were allowed to do so, there would be little open country left. To stop such development and to protect the countryside was one of the reasons for the passing of the Planning Act(s) 60 years ago. You will find that the more lovely the landscape, the more restrictive planning control is likely to be. It is true that, in some areas, measures have been adopted to encourage agricultural diversification. This usually takes the form of allowing redundant agricultural buildings to be converted for new uses. I do not know of authorities that permit new houses in open country, except for housing workers employed in the countryside.

There is a controversial government policy guidance, known as PPG7, introduced by John Gummer in the previous government and now likely to be withdrawn by the present administration. This document envisages the construction of new "stately homes" in open countryside, requiring them to be of "high architectural quality". This might give you a foot in the door, but I do not think that a modest Norwegian style log cabin is likely to come within the remit of this document.
« Last Edit: December 31, 2003, 08:30:38 pm by admin »
The Brookmans Park Newsletter has been supporting the village and our local community since 1998 by providing free, interactive tools for all to use.
 

Offline jet

  • Opinions on everything
  • *****
  • Posts: 1285
  • Gender: Male
Re: 20 acre field
« Reply #36 on: December 31, 2003, 09:56:26 pm »
This rich persons folly, disguised as a smallholding must be resisted at all costs.
However quoting guidelines etc will not work, we need laws and precedents to quote or else the council will be powerless to prevent approval going through.
In this current climate virtually anything is passed due to the governments wish to promote house building at any cost.
The environment comes last where expansion is concerned.
regards,
jet
 

Offline Largey

  • Opinions on many things
  • ***
  • Posts: 102
Re: 20 acre field
« Reply #37 on: December 31, 2003, 11:10:35 pm »
Don't we all just get fed up with property developers trying to squeeze into green belt land. Its obvious that there must be heavy finance behind this which has been clearly demonstrated already by funds spent on planning / design etc..,
One day developers will get the hint that trying to develop on such land is pointless, but ONLY if they are strongly and promptly refused any consideration in the first place.
NMGB Keep up the fight... Everyone is behind you (I hope !!).....

Regards,


 

Offline Bob Horrocks

  • Opinions on everything
  • *****
  • Posts: 1555
  • Gender: Male
  • Expertises:
  • Green Belt
  • Parish Council
Re: 20 acre field
« Reply #38 on: January 02, 2004, 04:32:49 pm »
It is not true that the government wants housing AT ANY COST.  One house on 21 acres?

Very recently an appeal was dismissed to build three houses on three quarters of an acre at the end of Welham Manor, off Dixons Hill Rd, Welham Green. This land is in the Green Belt, but the Planning Inspector dismissed the appeal mainly because the density was too low!  Not because it was Green Belt land.  The inference was that an application at a higher density would have been approved.  

The NM Green Belt Soc has raised with John Prescott through the London Green Belt Council because of the national implications.  We will let you know the outcome.

On www.greenbeltsociety.org.uk in the 'Appeals' section on housing you can read many cases of housing appeals being dismissed because the land was in the Green Belt.

Offline Editor

  • David Brewer
  • Administrator
  • Opinions on everything
  • *****
  • Posts: 8888
  • Thanked: 137 times
  • Gender: Male
    • Media Helping Media
  • Expertises:
  • Media consultant
  • Journalism trainer
  • Walking
  • Real ale
Re: 20 acre field
« Reply #39 on: January 07, 2004, 12:34:04 am »
The WHT has been looking at this story this week and it's likely the newpaper will have more coverage in its Wednesday 7 January issue.

If you can't get out to buy it you can always read the main news stories on the WHT online around lunchtime of the day of publication.

Click here for the WHT online, and then click on the news button on the left and scroll down.

Always look at the date at the W/C date at the top of the page to check whether the site has been updated or not.
« Last Edit: January 07, 2004, 12:35:04 am by admin »
The Brookmans Park Newsletter has been supporting the village and our local community since 1998 by providing free, interactive tools for all to use.
 

Offline Editor

  • David Brewer
  • Administrator
  • Opinions on everything
  • *****
  • Posts: 8888
  • Thanked: 137 times
  • Gender: Male
    • Media Helping Media
  • Expertises:
  • Media consultant
  • Journalism trainer
  • Walking
  • Real ale
Re: 20 acre field
« Reply #40 on: January 07, 2004, 02:09:31 pm »
The WHT has the 20-acre story live on its site now. Click here.
The Brookmans Park Newsletter has been supporting the village and our local community since 1998 by providing free, interactive tools for all to use.
 

Offline Bob Horrocks

  • Opinions on everything
  • *****
  • Posts: 1555
  • Gender: Male
  • Expertises:
  • Green Belt
  • Parish Council
Re: 20 acre field
« Reply #41 on: January 07, 2004, 05:44:50 pm »
The WH Times article has prompted a phone call from the applicant's agent.  The power of the press!
She stated that the prime objective of this planning application is to build a house, and not farming.  She also conceded that the proposed rare breed farming did not require 24/7 on-site management.

Offline Editor

  • David Brewer
  • Administrator
  • Opinions on everything
  • *****
  • Posts: 8888
  • Thanked: 137 times
  • Gender: Male
    • Media Helping Media
  • Expertises:
  • Media consultant
  • Journalism trainer
  • Walking
  • Real ale
Re: 20 acre field
« Reply #42 on: January 12, 2004, 03:11:16 pm »
A number of local residents have had replies to letters they sent to WHDC, objecting to plans to develop the 20-acre field.

The letters read...

Quote

S6/2003/1701/FP (Please quote this reference on all correspondence)

RE: ERECTION OF A NEW COUNTRY HOUSE at LAND AT FRIDAY GROVE, NORTH OF HAWKSHEAD ROAD, BROOKMANS PARK, HATFIELD

"Thank you for your recent letter in respect of the above. I write to confirm that points raised will be taken into consideration in the determination of this application. I regret to advise you that due to the volume of correspondence received in relation to planning and other applications it will not be possible to enter into individual correspondence with you. However, I will write again to advise you of the Council's decision in due course."

Yours faithfully,

C J Conway
Chief Planning and
Environmental Health Officer



NMDGBS meets tonight to consider its response to the application. Details of the outcome of that meeting will be posted on this site soon after. For the most recent news click here.

All objections have to be in by Friday 16 January.
The Brookmans Park Newsletter has been supporting the village and our local community since 1998 by providing free, interactive tools for all to use.
 

Offline Editor

  • David Brewer
  • Administrator
  • Opinions on everything
  • *****
  • Posts: 8888
  • Thanked: 137 times
  • Gender: Male
    • Media Helping Media
  • Expertises:
  • Media consultant
  • Journalism trainer
  • Walking
  • Real ale
Re: 20 acre field
« Reply #43 on: January 13, 2004, 12:16:59 am »
At their meeting tonight, the North Mymms District Green Belt Society decided to oppose the proposal to build a country house on the 20-acre field, which is part of the local green belt.

The NMDGBS said that there is nothing in either the current District Plan, or District Plan Review, which would justify approval.

Click here for more details
The Brookmans Park Newsletter has been supporting the village and our local community since 1998 by providing free, interactive tools for all to use.
 

Celia

  • Guest
Re: 20 acre field
« Reply #44 on: January 22, 2004, 03:29:57 pm »
I have read through the discussion thread regarding this topic & wish you all the luck there is with this objection. Having been through a recent objection case regarding the cherry pickers in Warrengate Road I know how frustrating a 'blot' on the landscape can be. As you may have read from Bob Horrocks reply - we lost. After starting off with a petition in March 2001 as the land was being used in breach of what it was originally there for, we carried on after the enforcement notice was issued to stop using the site as that type of business. However surprise surprise, the owner appealed against the decision & won. The decision finally coming to a conclusion as per Bob's email. Consequences - not a desirable area to live as it once was & house prices deteriorating by the day. If only the person buying the 20 Acre field had bought where the cherry pickers are -
the outlook would have been far nicer for the residents!! - Good luck......
 

Offline Editor

  • David Brewer
  • Administrator
  • Opinions on everything
  • *****
  • Posts: 8888
  • Thanked: 137 times
  • Gender: Male
    • Media Helping Media
  • Expertises:
  • Media consultant
  • Journalism trainer
  • Walking
  • Real ale
Re: 20 acre field
« Reply #45 on: January 22, 2004, 04:55:18 pm »
The views from the 20-acre field towards Brookmans Park are interesting. According to the NMDGBS, the proposal states that the openness of the green belt will be preserved, because the house will be visible from very few, if any, public places, due to the topography and the design, which sculptures the house into the landscape.

However, this angle shows the view towards Bluebridge Road.



This angle shows the view toward The Grove.



And this shows the view over towards Moffats Lane.

The Brookmans Park Newsletter has been supporting the village and our local community since 1998 by providing free, interactive tools for all to use.
 

Offline Bob Horrocks

  • Opinions on everything
  • *****
  • Posts: 1555
  • Gender: Male
  • Expertises:
  • Green Belt
  • Parish Council
Re: 20 acre field
« Reply #46 on: January 22, 2004, 07:59:48 pm »
Dave
If you have not already done so, could you send these pictures to Welwyn Hatfield Council quoting their reference number.  It should help counter what has been said by the applicant.  Mind you, the planning officers will visit, or have visited, the site.  So they will form their own opinion as to the visibility of the proposed house.

Regarding the cherrypickers.  On the positive side, they are no longer sticking up in the air and they can only be moved on site and worked on during certain hours.

tookolosh

  • Guest
Re: 20 acre field
« Reply #47 on: February 02, 2004, 05:37:31 pm »
I see that the NMGBS have objected  (on behalf of their 1000 members) to two well thought out planning applications, that could result in the district being home to a night club and an intensive pig farm.  

The owners of the San Felice restaurant have applied for planning permission to convert the building to 8 flats, and despite rumours that if refused it may become a nightclub, the NMDGBS have sent their strong objections.

The owner of the 20 acre field has applied for planning permission for a low built eco-friendly house, designed by a nationally recognised architect that complies with national planning guidance for courntry houses.  If refused, Brookmans Park may end up with couple of hundred pigs on the doorstep, and pig farms stink!!  Yet still the NMDGBS have objected.  

For the new residents of Brookmans Park, Friday Grove (20 Acre Field) which had a farmhouse on it back to the 15th century, is next to Raybrook  Farm which until quite recently was a pig farm!

Unless the NMDGBS and their 1000 members want the desirability of Brookmans Park to go downhill as fast as the value of their houses they should request that the NMDGBS withdraw their objections and support both the above applications before it is too late!
 

John_fraser

  • Guest
Re: 20 acre field
« Reply #48 on: February 02, 2004, 06:39:08 pm »
“Rumour” is a very interesting word. Do you have any evidence to back up this rumour? Also what grounds do you have for the “pig farm” remark?

Your mail is quite forceful and you clearly feel strongly about these matters, but I would like to check if you have any interest in these developments, other then as a concerned resident?

(I am not a member of NMDGBS, but I did object)
« Last Edit: February 02, 2004, 06:40:45 pm by John_fraser »
 

Offline Bob Horrocks

  • Opinions on everything
  • *****
  • Posts: 1555
  • Gender: Male
  • Expertises:
  • Green Belt
  • Parish Council
Re: 20 acre field
« Reply #49 on: February 02, 2004, 07:03:50 pm »
I suggest Tookolosh and everyone else checks the truth on www.greenbeltsociety.org.uk - draft minutes of its meeting on 12 January 2004. :o

The NM Green Belt Society did NOT object to San Felice being converted into 8 flats.  It said to Welwyn Hatfield Council that the application lacked information on car parking and landscaping, and we did not wish to see garages built. We also asked that this application for flats should not be compared with any other application for flats in the area.

The GBS did check the 'Friday Grove' (20 acre field) planning application VERY carefully, and objected most strongly, as did various local residents.  The national planning guidance which includes 'Country Houses' is in PPG7 - Countryside environment.  These policies do NOT overrule PPG2 (Green Belt).  PPG7 says so very clearly in paragraph 4.11.  A new house on Green Belt land is inappropriate development particularly where no building exists.  The very special circumstances put forward by the applicant do not, in our opinion, justify overturning Green Belt policies.

A farmhouse is shown on plans between 1760s and 1860s, and has not existed for 140+ years.  I have carefully studied the many reports and copies of ancient maps supporting this planning application which included this information.  Tookolosh is wrong by three centuries.  To try and justify a new house where none has existed for 140+ years is stretching a point, surely?

The 20-acre fields have not been used for pig farming in the 21 years I have lived in this area.  They are used  for sheep farming, and have been for many years. The fields do not belong to Raybrook Farm as far as I know.  Raybrook is used for horses, and I cannot recall ever seeing pigs there.  Does anyone else?  My memory is not perfect so I may have forgotten.  

If permission for the house is not given, is the applicant threatening to get rid of the sheep and put 200+ pigs on the fields?  Where did you get this idea from, dear Tookolosh or should that be 'Loadoftosh'? I am usually very polite but you ask for it.  Come clean, and stop trying to scare residents with your nonsense.

Offline jet

  • Opinions on everything
  • *****
  • Posts: 1285
  • Gender: Male
Re: 20 acre field
« Reply #50 on: February 02, 2004, 07:56:01 pm »
Thanks as usual to bobcatuk for countering tosh with fact.
It would be preferable to have pigs on the site rather than the half baked planaterium house design mooted.
Pigs only cause a problem if they are unnaturally constrained. They are preferable as neighbours than most humans.
Any livestock proposals would be subject to regulations and any smell would be countered by an EH order.
I think we can put the pig red herring to bed.
Most houses in this area have codicils in their deeds which prevent livestock etc  being kept, these were added by the farmers who originally sold the land to prevent competition.
If flats or nightclubs are built, again these wil be subject to regulations. These will preclude any viable propositions.
Car parking is of prime concern to planners, again if it caused nuisance ( like noise) notices would be served.
Facts are we do not need or want these unwellcome constructions in our village settings.
Too many eyesore extensions have been built as it is.
regards,
jet
 

Mary_Morgan

  • Guest
Re: 20 acre field
« Reply #51 on: February 02, 2004, 08:03:16 pm »
Just for the record, I can remember there being a pig farm at Raybrook in the 1950s/60s and maybe later - don't remember when it ceased.   Never thought it smelt bad (I lived towards that end of Bluebridge Rd) - just a natural smell of a farm in farmland.  

As to the rest of the thread, I am not sure I really have an opinion about the "country house".   Logically, if it was not there when the green belt law came into being I cannot see that the existence of a house pre-dating the law has any relevance for the applicant's argument for permission to be allowed.

As to San Felice.  Shame to see a good, but under-utilised, restaurant closing.  Flats or a nightclub - I can see nothing wrong with either, as long as the vision for traffic exiting is improved.  

Mary
 

Offline Mermaid

  • Forum Moderator
  • Opinions on everything
  • *****
  • Posts: 1575
  • Thanked: 30 times
  • Gender: Female
  • Forum Member
Re: 20 acre field
« Reply #52 on: February 02, 2004, 08:45:41 pm »
Gosh, it does sound like someone may be trying to threaten us. I'd like to say to 'Talkaloadoftosh' that not all of us live here because the house prices are high, some of us live here because we like the area - and that includes our lovely bit of Green Belt. House prices may go up and house prices may go down, but this is our home - chosen because of the setting. The children and I enjoy seeing the animals on that piece of land and we don't feel that anyone should build a house there. We also happen to like pigs, and wouldn't mind them at all!
 

Offline Editor

  • David Brewer
  • Administrator
  • Opinions on everything
  • *****
  • Posts: 8888
  • Thanked: 137 times
  • Gender: Male
    • Media Helping Media
  • Expertises:
  • Media consultant
  • Journalism trainer
  • Walking
  • Real ale
Re: 20 acre field
« Reply #53 on: February 05, 2004, 09:19:28 am »
Quote
In the meantime, Friday Grove is our immediate issue.  The simple fact is that this house does not comply with GreenBelt policies.  But your comments on this website will be unknown by Welwyn Hatfield Council.  It is very important to given your comments to that Council.  You can see the plans during normal business hours at the Council offices, located between Waitrose and Campus West at WGC.  

The council must receive your comments by 16 January 2004. Address them to the Chief Planning Officer, Welwyn Hatfield Council, Council Offices, Welwyn Garden City, Hertfordshire, AL8 6AE, quoting their reference S6/2003/1701/FP (Mrs Reynolds).


Hi Bob,

Can you update us on what happens next regarding the 20-acre field? What is the timetable for consideration of the proposal? Do you know any more about the suggestions made earlier in this thread of an alternative use for the site should the application fail?

David
The Brookmans Park Newsletter has been supporting the village and our local community since 1998 by providing free, interactive tools for all to use.
 

Offline Bob Horrocks

  • Opinions on everything
  • *****
  • Posts: 1555
  • Gender: Male
  • Expertises:
  • Green Belt
  • Parish Council
Re: 20 acre field
« Reply #54 on: February 06, 2004, 02:50:46 pm »
This application is being considered by the planning officers.  They will still accept comments from anyone, right up to when a decision is taken.  There is no formal deadline for their decision, which could be to approve or reject it or refer it to the WH Planning Control Board.   The normal expectation is a decsion within 8 weeks of submitting the application but some take longer.

Just out of interest, the CPRE - Herts Soc (Campaign to Protect Rural England) have also objected to this proposal.

Pigs?  Great idea.  My son has a couple on his land and they do not smell, but they squeal a lot when you go to see them.  Same breed as the two that escaped a few years ago and got national headlines - 'the Tamworth Two'.  Don't know how profitable pigs are.  Bowmans Farm, now Willows, had lots but got rid of them a few years ago.

Offline Carolyn

  • Opinions on some things
  • **
  • Posts: 32
  • Gender: Female
Re: 20 acre field
« Reply #55 on: June 15, 2004, 08:58:30 pm »
Any update on the application for this site?
ex resident - now living in New Zealand
 

Offline Mallow

  • Opinions on many things
  • ***
  • Posts: 111
  • Gender: Female
  • Forum Member
Re: 20 acre field
« Reply #56 on: June 16, 2004, 03:34:39 pm »
I don't know anything about the application for the 20 acre field but the same person who bought it has, apparently, just bought the house called Catalina Field in Hawkshead Lane.  He told the vendor that he wanted it for his family house.  The proposal for the 20 acre field states that the owner would have to line there because of the rare breads.  So... is he going to live at Catalina Field or at the house which may be built at Friday Grove?
Life is not about waiting for the storm to pass, it's about learning to dance in the rain!
 

Offline Bob Horrocks

  • Opinions on everything
  • *****
  • Posts: 1555
  • Gender: Male
  • Expertises:
  • Green Belt
  • Parish Council
Re: 20 acre field
« Reply #57 on: June 16, 2004, 03:38:43 pm »
Still no decision by Welwyn Hatfield Council.

Someone else proposed a Country House in the Essex Green Belt and was refused, and his appeal dismissed.  There appear to be many similarities to the proposals for Friday Grove, and I have drawn them to the attention of Welwyn Hatfield Council.

I will update the Forum when I hear anything.


Offline Alfred the Great

  • Opinions on many things
  • ***
  • Posts: 316
  • Gender: Male
Re: 20 acre field
« Reply #58 on: June 17, 2004, 01:31:16 am »
At last I have the opportunity to ask why that house at Hawkshead is called Catalina Fields - must be a good reason to go to all that trouble to have a good image of the plane moulded on the sign.

I was aware that a Lancaster bomber came down nearby during the war, but don't know of any connection with Catalinas.

ATG
Confucius he say "a dog is for life not just for Christmas Dinner"
 

Offline Mallow

  • Opinions on many things
  • ***
  • Posts: 111
  • Gender: Female
  • Forum Member
Re: 20 acre field
« Reply #59 on: June 17, 2004, 07:24:24 pm »
The original owner who had the house built in 1947 for his family house was a Catalina Fying Boat pilot.
Life is not about waiting for the storm to pass, it's about learning to dance in the rain!
 

Tags: