Seven self-build homes at Land To The North Of Chickney Road, Henham

What was proposed

The application proposed seven self-build homes with parking, open space, landscaping, infrastructure and a new vehicle access.

“PROPOSAL: Erection of 7 no. self-build dwellings with associated car parking, open space, landscape, and ancillary infrastructure, including vehicular access…”

Officer report

The site and its setting

The site is an arable field beside housing and a public footpath, about 700 metres from Henham’s centre, without a marked footpath along Chickney Road.

“The application site relates to an irregular-shaped parcel of land located on the northern side of Chickney Road to the north-east of the settlement of Henham. The site is located between the recent housing development off Maitland Close to the west, and a vehicular track for farm vehicles which is also a public footpath, to the east.”

“The site is located within Flood Zone 1 where there is considered to be the lowest risk of flooding. The site is located approximately 330-metres from the edge of Henham Conservation Area, however as a result of intervening modern development, the site is not considered to form part of the setting of the heritage asset.”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended approval, considering the site within Henham’s built area and the layout compatible with the settlement pattern and village edge.

“In accordance with Code A1 of the Uttlesford Design Code (2026), the site lies within the built area of Henham which is designated as a Larger Village under Core Policy 3 in which there is a presumption in favour of sustainable development, as re-iterated by Policy S4 of the NPPF (2026).”

“The overall layout, density and orientation of the dwellings would be compatible to the surrounding urban grain and the settlement pattern, and would preserve and better enhance the edge of settlement location, “rounding-off” development to the north of Chickney Road forming a greater definement of the village’s built area. The addition of 7no. self-build…”

Officer report

Consultation responses

Highways, the Health and Safety Executive, ecology, environmental health and gas consultees raised no objection, subject to conditions where stated.

“No objection subject to conditions. UDC Environmental Health consultee response can be found in Appendix 4 of this report.”

Officer report

Who spoke

Three speakers spoke against the application, including the parish council, while the agent spoke in support.

What members debated

Members questioned the site’s location, cramped layout, previous appeal, landscape effects, settlement pattern, containment and whether development should follow the emerging neighbourhood plan.

“Members discussed: • The clustered, cramped layout and the need to breathe. • The previous benefits of the design of 16 properties proposed in 2020 rather than the proposed current number of 7. Members noted the reasons previously given for the dismissal of the appeal in 2020, notably that it was not in keeping or in an appropriate position. • That although the proposal was compliant with Design Code standards, it was not visually in the right place.”

Minutes

The committee’s decision

Councillor Haynes proposed refusal, seconded by Councillor Sutton, and the committee authorised refusal because the site was outside the built area and had pattern, containment and landscape problems.

“Councillor Haynes proposed refusal of the application, on the basis that it was outside of the existing built area (CP3), there were pattern and containment issues relating to the Design Code B1.2C and B1.3C, and Landscape Grounds (CP41). This was seconded by Councillor Sutton.”

“RESOLVED that the Strategic Director of Planning be authorised to refuse permission for the development in accordance with the proposal above.”

Minutes