Mobile home storage and office at Newgatestreet Road, Goff's Oak

“DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL 3.1 The application seeks full planning permission for the retention of an open storage use for the parking of luxury mobile homes (Class B8) on the rear car park area and the proposed office use (Class E(g)(i)) of the former Gospel Hall building for a temporary period of three years.”

“The applicant confirms that the proposal does not include manufacturing nor repairs on site, only the storage of the mobile homes prior to delivery to customers. No buildings are proposed to be constructed. A submitted Delivery and Site Management Plan confirms that the home units are delivered on trailers towed by Land Rover style vehicles and that no HGV movements are required. There would be a maximum of 4no.”

“SUMMARY 1.1 This application seeks full planning permission for retention of a Class B8 open storage use for parking of luxury mobile homes and the proposed office use (Class E(g)(i))) of the former Gospel Hall for a temporary period of three years. The report considers the relevant planning considerations with regard to planning policies for this site including principle of development in the Green Belt (GB), design, amenity and highway matters.”

“There is an area of soft landscaping which extends into the site by approximately 50m up to the meeting hall building., The meeting hall is the only building on the application site and is single storey, constructed of brick with hipped tiled roof with a footprint of c.114sq.m. A parking area for 5 cars exists to the front (south) entrance of the meeting hall.”

“As noted in the planning history section, there is an existing s106 agreement which includes obligations limiting the use of the building and the site. The applicant’s Planning Statement confirms that the applicant will commence the process of removing the obligation, but officers are unaware of any formal process. The recommendation below reflects the fact that the existing s106 agreement would need a deed of modification before planning permission could be granted.”

“RECOMMENDATION 9.1 That planning permission be granted subject to: (i) the applicant negotiating and completing a deed or modification and discharge of the planning obligations within the extant s106 legal agreement in accordance with the requirements of Statutory Instrument 1992 no.2832, and following completion of the deed; (ii) the following planning conditions: Retrospective time limit (existing development) and time limit for the proposed development; 2.”

“The visual impact on the streetscene and character of the area is largely covered in the above section. The mobile homes would be partially seen from various viewpoints as discussed above. However, the parked mobile homes are positioned well into the site and benefit form partial screening from vegetation.”

“Noise and disturbance associated with the use – considered above; • harm visual character of the area and result a loss amenity for nearby residents – considered above; • precedent for future industrialisation development - the application should be considered on its merits; • inappropriate development in the Green Belt – considered above; • destruction of trees prior to application being made – there are no protected trees on-site; • significantly affect the amenity value…”

“Dangerous bend in the road; • removal of trees on site, loss of amenity value, dangerous access, unnecessary change of use; • loss of biodiversity taken place, inadequate 10% Biodiversity Net Gain (BNG); • temporary permission of three years could involve the future development of site for housing; • breach of planning permission and section 106 Agreement; • the mobile homes are visible from the road and completely alter the street scene and character of Newgatestreet Road;…”

“Noise and disturbance associated with the use; • harm visual character of the area and result a loss amenity for nearby residents; • precedent for future industrialisation development; • inappropriate development in the Green Belt; • destruction of trees prior to application being made; • significantly affect the amenity value of users of designated footpath 25; • there are numerous other facilities within short distance to M25 in Enfield and South Mimms.”

“Consultation The following consultation responses have been received: BBC Environmental Health – No objection 5.5 HCC Highways – No objection, subject to a condition that vehicle movements and all associated activities shall be carried out strictly in accordance with the Delivery and Site Management Plan at all times. There was an initial holding objection regarding incorrect and insufficient information in relation to visibility splays.”

“RESOLVED that planning permission be refused on the following grounds;”

“(a) the development being an inappropriate use of the greenbelt; and (b) concerns regarding highway safety that is relating to the access and egress to the application site.”