Application withdrawn

The application for the redevelopment of Little Hay involving the dumping of 247,000 cubic metres of construction waste has been withdrawn.

It has been a long haul from the initial publicity in May 2013 when the proposals were announced as a redevelopment at no cost to the taxpayer and involving ecological improvements. In the ensuing sixteen months, as the plans were scrutinised more closely the reality became clear.  The combined opposition of Dacorum Borough Council planners, The Campaign for the Protection of Rural England, the Environment Agency and many others started to ring alarm bells.  All the time your letters of objection were mounting up.  Many of these, along with those from Box Lane and Bovingdon expressed deep concern for our rural environment. In the end, Hertfordshire County Council's own planning department recommended refusal.  At this point it became clear to the applicant that what was proposed would cause considerable damage.

A big thank you to those who worked so hard to safeguard our environment.

Development Control Committee Meeting HCC

The planning application for Little Hay Golf Course Remodelling will be heard at the County Council’s Development Control Committee Meeting on 21^st October at County Hall.

As you will already have seen, the recommendation of Hertfordshire’s County Council Planning Officer is refusal.  Nevertheless, the decision rests with the Planning Control Committee. 

We understand that Richard Roberts our County Councillor and Jack Organ our Dacorum Councillor will speak opposing the application.  Rachel Biggs will present a petition which she has worked with others to produce.  Mike Pritchard will speak on behalf of Bourne End.  Malcolm Davey, a resident of Box Lane will, speak on behalf of Bourne End Bovingdon and Box Lane Action group.

We hope others will be able to attend, demonstrating the strength of feeling opposing the plan.  The meeting will start at 10.00 a.m.  A map showing the location of County Hall is available here, and a map showing parking is a available here.

Recommendation that permission should be refused

The report prepared for Hertfordshire Development Control Committee has now been published.  It recommends that planning permission should be refused.

The full report can be read here.

Does this recommendation to refuse mean the application is now dead?  No ! This is a very positive step, but, there is still a ‘but’! The committee of Herts County councillors (who in this case are the relevant authority) could still recommend approval. To do this, they would have to overturn the recommendations of both Hertfordshire and Dacorum’s planners and a whole range of other objections. 

Separately Dacorum ( the landowners  but not the operator) have to give permission. Under these circumstances we would consider that as landowners Dacorum would find it hard to justify to its electorate the wisdom of proceeding.  But the considerations may not quite be the same.

Remember that the whole saga has continued for well over a year after Dacorum’s planners firmly rejected the proposals! We, and you, need therefore to continue with our objections on both fronts.  Members of BEVA and the Bovingdon, Box Lane and Bourne End Action Group will be speaking at the planning meeting at County Hall on 21^st October.    

Little Hay: Revamp or landfill?

Click here for important update information

Why a blog about

Little Hay?

You have arrived here perhaps because you have an interest in the plans for Little Hay, or perhaps someone has pointed you in this direction.  Our aim is to guide you through the story as it unfolded to members of Bourne End village.  We will provide you with a brief outline, but give you access to original documents if you wish to delve further.

Let's be clear, we are not neutral in this, we are objecting to the proposals and would like you to support us. Yet, above all, we are seeking transparency. We are keen for you to understand the proposals, the way that they have come about, and what they could mean to our communities and environment.
 
Whatever you decide, remember that if you live in Dacorum, this is your land.  The council is acting as your representative, and your views are important.

Why is the blog needed?

For a number of reasons the application is being handled in a slightly unusual way, making it hard for the public to be involved.

1. As the redevelopment would involve disposal of waste, the application is being determined by Hertfordshire County Council (HCC).  Dacorum Borough Council (DBC) is merely acting as a consultee in just the same way as you or I.
2. For this proposal to take place, two things must happen.  Acting on your behalf, the landowner, Dacorum Borough Council must give landlord's consent.  Hertfordshire County Council as the planning authority must give planning consent. Dacorum councillors have decided that they will only consider landlord's consent if and when planning consent is granted. (This seems to us a somewhat odd way to proceed.)
3. Planning applications must include a Design and Access Statement.  Until recently, the format of this was tightly prescribed to ensure that the public could readily understand what is proposed. Recently this requirement was lifted.  (Along with the reduction in Notification Period, this was presumably on the assumption that Pre Planning Consultation had taken place.) The Design and Access Statement for this development is 120 pages long.  If you wish to read it, it can be found here. 
4. The area is very popular with walkers, and many visitors come from different parts of the borough and beyond. They are not aware of the proposals. The Notification which was posted around the site at the time of the initial application made no mention of import of materials!

All the documents in the public domain can be found on  Hertfordshire's Website .

How do I use this blog?

We have tried to describe the situation as it has unfolded to those of us in Bourne End.  We want to keep it brief, but along the way we have provided links to further details.
Please note that all links open in new windows which can be closed to return to the main blog.

The story as it unfolded

The Gazette Press Release

The first we heard about the proposals was the article in the Hemel Gazette which described the revamp, concentrating on the recycling of water, new driving range and ecological enhancements, all at no cost to the taxpayer.  It was clearly a win-win situation. The full text can be found here For many living outside the immediate area, this remains the picture.

Notification

When the residents of Bourne End received a planning notification, they too thought little of it.  Many read only the headline which largely reiterated the newspaper's press release.  Ironically, where the press release had mentioned the importation of soil, there was no mention in the headline of the notification.  It was not until the third page that the 295,000 cubic metres together with the 150 vehicle movements a day became apparent. The full text can be found here

But most busy people did not read beyond the first paragraph where the focus was clearly on the revamp of the golf course.  For many, the enormity of the operation was missed. 

Errors in the Notification

A careful reading of the actual application revealed a disparity between the summary and the intentions of the applicant. Where the summary referred to ‘inert material (clean soils)’, the applicant defined ‘inert material’ as ‘…. including construction waste.’   (See ‘Design and Access Statement’ page 29.)  HCC agreed to issue an amended ‘Notification’.  This delayed the progress of the application.  Yet more delay occurred when it was revealed that the farms leading off Upper Bourne End Lane had not been included.

The delays resulted in the application being put back to the planning meeting in September giving local residents an opportunity to study it.  

The Access Route

At first it seemed the major issue was the use of Upper Bourne End Lane.  If you are not familiar with it, you can see the lane here, together with a few views of the golf course.  It's a single track sunken road and quite a steep gradient. The prospect of a vehicle moving up or down this lane every 4 minutes seemed preposterous, and this assumed the vehicles would neatly arrive every 4 minutes!  What about the residents living at the end of the lane?  We quickly realised that there are serious safety issues, with the traffic mixing with pedestrians, horses and other vehicles, not to mention the prospect of vehicles waiting on the slip road.  It was while looking closely at this aspect that we realised the deep flaws which might well be reflected in the entire application.

1. The application makes reference to an historic access to the golf course along Upper Bourne End Lane.  We have demonstrated that it has never existed.
2. The application assumes that the residents of Upper Bourne End Lane have access from the Bovingdon side of the airfield.  They do not.
3. There was clearly little understanding of other uses of the lane, for activities on the airfield, by pedestrians and by horse riders.
4. There was no understanding of the constant battle fought by the council to ensure that the area would remain essentially rural.

What is the purpose of the operation?

The applicant argues that without revamping, an already struggling golf course will fail and the land will become derelict.  The development would include creating a lake and a storage reservoir, removing a hill which purportedly has caused heart attacks, and creating a new driving range.  It is argued that these changes will make a better golf course with more revenue and will reduce the costs of irrigation. The proposals also include ecological improvements.  You might think it odd that making a lake and removing a hill requires close to 1/3 million cubic metres of waste.  In essence, it is the money generated by the disposal of the waste that will fund the changes.

What is planned to happen?

Much of the waste would go under the driving range and more would be used in the creation of 'bunding', lumps and bumps more normally used as screening.  Over a period of eighteen months and in phases, the soil would be stripped away, the waste material dumped, then covered over with the original soil.  The golf course would be reinstated.  It would take place in phases, and although clearly disruptive, the intention would be to keep the golf course in operation.

The plans involve the removal of over 500 trees.  Although this is clearly necessary to dump the waste, It is argued that many of these are inappropriate as non native trees.  Those that would replace them would be native species.  This would be part of the ecological improvements which would also include natural meadow land.

What is the view of Bourne End Village Association?

As referred to earlier, our initial response was to the dangers and destructive aspects of the access route, together with the totally unacceptable imposition on the residents who use Upper Bourne End Lane.  It took some time to realise the enormity of the operation and the impact it would have on our environment.

You can read our objection in full here, but in essence we feel that the disruption and damage is disproportionate to the potential gains.  Indeed, we question whether any real improvement will be made to the golf course.  Much of the 'improvement' consists of raising the driving range and increasing its size.  For the rest of the golf course, much of the waste will be used to produce lumps and bumps between the fairways.  (The result, as one landscape architect has put it, to produce an 'alien landscape'.  But more of that later.) Have all possibilities such as improving maintenance been explored?  It is interesting to note that when it was originally conceived, it was seen as an near ideal site for a golf course, requiring very little modification. The press article of the time can be found here.

It is of course easy to counter this with the argument that the disruption would be short term. Of course, disruption would be considerable over the 18 months of importing material, but it would be decades before the trees matured, and even then the topography would have been radically altered.  As for the ecological gains, it is absurd to suggest that removing the vegetation and topsoil, dumping construction waste and replacing it is the most effective way to improve the environment!  The lack of native trees could be addressed in a more environmentally friendly way by a programme of replacement.  

So far we have been backed up in our views by over 100 letters of objection.  

What are the views of the experts?

It is the views of the experts which has filled us with alarm!  In particular, that from Dacorum's own planning department.  We reproduce here a few quotes.

Dacorum Borough Council Development Control Service Unit

‘What is the purpose of the application? Is the proposal the depositing of waste or remodelling of the course?’

(Case Officer’s report 12th July 2013, reiterated on the appointment of a new case officer)

Quite extraordinarily, to accept the application, DBC councillors would have to overturn a series of policies which they adopted in September 2013.  (Yes, that's right, at the same time that they already knew about this application!)  One of them, Policy 78, specifically outlaws this sort of development in order to protect our environment.  You can read the policy here. It's quite short and clear. 

The Environment Agency

The applicant claims that this is 'recycling'. The Environment Agency clearly disagrees. 

‘Failure to minimise the waste deposit would mean this is a disposal activity and be classified as landfill. This would then need to comply with the Landfill Directive (1999).’

(Letter from Environment Agency to Hertfordshire County Council 6th August 2013)

CPRE (Campaign to Protect Rural England)

‘CPRE Hertfordshire objects to this planning application because very special circumstances for the importation of the proposed volume of waste have not been demonstrated by the applicant.’
‘The proposed development would also have an adverse impact on the local landscape …’
(Letter to Hertfordshire County Council 26th June 2013)

Dacorum Borough Council Woodlands Officer

The setting and pleasant ambience of Upper Bourne End Lane, particularly next to Hanging Wood will be lost for the duration of the project and possibly will never be fully restored.

Jenny Habib, Chiltern Society Planning Field Officer

‘The extent and scale of the proposals would have a devastating effect on the character and appearance of the area as a whole and will severely impact on the Chilterns Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.’
(Letter printed in Hemel Gazette July 3rd 2013)

Liz Lake Associates Report

Hertfordshire County Council commissioned a firm of Landscape Architects to assess the impact of the proposals.  The full report can be found here. The following extract may serve to indicate the potential impact.

‘But on account of the extensive area of 'alien' steep topography proposed (to be created by importation of alien materials) and some further damage to the vestiges of the historic landscape at Westbrook Hay, the proposals will have a significant negative impact on landscape character within most of the application area which will need to be taken into account in determination.’

The full reports are all available on Hertfordshire's Website . 

What Is the Current State of Play?

• Bourne End Village Association is working with residents from Box Lane and Bovingdon to jointly oppose the application.  (The BBB Action Group)
• Having had the original application using Upper Bourne End Lane turned down, the applicant has submitted new proposals which would widen the lane.  
• Dacorum Borough Council is sitting on its hands waiting for the planning application to be determined.  (As we have seen, this is not entirely true!)  
• The planning application will be heard by HCC at the meeting in September.

What Can You Do?

There are two ways that this bizarre scheme can be stopped.

The Planning Application can be turned down.  This would be helped by you objecting.  You will need to write or e-mail.

Ms Jenny Foster
Spatial and Land Use Planning Unit
CHN216
County Hall
Hertford
Hertfordshire
SG13 8DN                Application Number:  4/1072-13 Little Hay Golf Course

e-mail:  Jenny.Foster@hertfordshire.gov.uk

Alternatively, you can comment on-line here.

Our council (Dacorum Borough Council) can refuse landlord's consent.   This can be achieved if we make it clear that we feel that the costs outweigh the advantages.  Contact your local DBC councillor to voice your opinion.  

There is an election coming up councillors ought to be mindful that they are acting as our representatives.