27 homes at 5 - 14 Ford Close, Bushey

What was proposed

The application sought approval for the appearance, landscaping, layout and scale of 27 homes, with parking, landscaping and access from Sutcliffe Close.

“DEVELOPMENT Application for the approval of reserved matters relating to appearance, landscaping, layout and scale for the erection of 27 dwellings, with associated car/cycle parking, landscaping and access from Sutcliffe Close, pursuant to outline planning permission reference 23/1135/OUT.”

Officer report

Earlier planning permission

Outline permission for 27 homes, including access from Sutcliffe Close, was granted on 11 June 2025.

“Reference number Description Date and outcome 23/1135/OUT Erection of 27 dwellings, with associated car/cycle parking, landscaping and access from Sutcliffe Close. (Outline Application to include Access, with all other matters reserved) 11 June 2025 Grant Permission…”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended approval because the development would provide acceptable design, landscaping, amenity, parking, drainage, sustainability measures and affordable housing.

“Officers consider that the proposal would provide a design and layout of an acceptable quality and which would provide a positive response to local character and context, incorporating varied building forms and appropriate materials, and a coherent layout. Amenity standards would be met together with associated infrastructural requirements, such as parking, SuDS, and means of enclosure. The scheme also provides policy compliant affordable housing.”

“Landscaping is considered acceptable. The scale and layout of the scheme would not compromise the wider landscape. Officers consider Policy SADM12 of the Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Plan and Policy CS12 of the Core Strategy are met.”

Officer report

What consultees said

Highways, arboriculture, conservation, landscape, utilities, water and flood-risk consultees raised no objections, while fire services requested a hydrant condition.

“Highways Does not wish to restrict the grant of permission. Arboriculture- Place Services- Essex County Council No objection. Conservation Advice-Place Services-Essex County Council No objections. Advise that the nearest designated heritage asset to the application site is the Grade II listed Tylers Farmhouse. The application site does not contribute to the appreciation or understanding of the listed building’s special architectural or historic interest.”

“Hertfordshire Fire & Rescue Service - Hydrants Only Request a condition for the provision and installation of fire hydrants to ensure there are adequate water supplies available for use in an emergency. Health & Safety Executive Does not advise on safety grounds, against the granting of planning permission.”

Officer report

What neighbours said

Twenty neighbours objected, citing overdevelopment, poor design, limited open space, privacy and security, highway safety, amenity, trees, ecology and flooding.

“High density development, overdevelopment, and out of keeping with the character and pattern of development in the area; • Poor design of building – is not high quality; • Inadequate provision of open space provided; • Proposed pedestrian routes / movements could impact privacy and security for neighbours; • Concern regarding highway capacity and safety. Would result in traffic congestion and on-street parking;”

“Adverse impact to neighbouring amenity. Overlooking and overbearing with poor distances between neighbouring properties and the site. • Adverse impact to trees and ecology. • Area is at risk of flooding. The development will make it worse.”

Officer report

Who spoke

The agent spoke for the application as the applicant.

Members’ views

Members supported the application and the provision of affordable housing.

“Members supported the application and the use of affordable housing.”

Minutes

The committee vote

Thirteen members voted for the recommendation, with no votes against and no abstentions.

“It was proposed by: Councillor B Rosehill, seconded by Councillor C Gray that the recommendations as set out in the report be agreed.”

“For: (13 total) - Councillors M Allen, C Gray, G Briski, P Richards, B Rosehill, M Amron, M Handley, N Susman, A Kaza, D Lambert, L Smith, H Green, P Morris. Against: (0 total) – No votes. Abstain: (0 total) – No votes. Total votes cast: 13”

Minutes

The decision

Planning permission was granted subject to the listed conditions, or amendments to those conditions where required.

“RESOLVED that planning permission be GRANTED subject to the conditions listed at the end of the report (or as otherwise inserted or amended, as required).”

Minutes