ALL THREE CHARACTER APPRAISALS prepared and developed in draft by the Hills Amenity Society have now been adapted for adoption by Epping Forest District Council, the first two in April and the third, Baldwins Hill, in June.

The appraisals, which can be found on the Council’s website or are available in hard copy form from the Council offices, define the character of the three areas and outline management plans for the area.

The major change is to the Baldwins Hill Conservation Area which, following pressure from the Hills Amenity Society and other bodies, now includes the Almshouses and adjoining Loughton Potato Ground which has been widely welcomed as important protection for the future.

The management plan for Staples Road states:

CONSERVATION AREA MANAGEMENT PLAN

General management objectives to preserve and enhance the conservation area

 

1. Ensure that any new development is to a high standard and is sympathetic to the character and appearance of the conservation area in terms of scale, massing, style and materials.

2. Discourage the use of unsympathetic modern materials such as uPVC, untreated aluminium and concrete roof tiles.

3. Ensure that the clean and tidy environment expected in a conservation area is maintained.

Short term objectives for enhancement

4. Discuss with local community groups how we can inform new residents and businesses that their properties are in a conservation area and the responsibility that this entails.

5. Carry out an audit of street furniture with particular reference to repair or replacing where necessary.

Medium term objectives for enhancement

6. Evaluate the visual impact and necessity of signage in the conservation area with a view to removing any unnecessary signs and replacing those necessary ones with more sympathetic alternatives.

And for Baldwins Hill only:

– Assess the current conservation area boundary and see if alterations need to be made

 

Historic allotments and almshouses to be given protection?

The historic Loughton Potato Ground allotments and the Almshouses at the bottom of Stony Path are being recommended to Epping Forest District Council for inclusion in the Baldwins Hill Conservation Area.

The surprise move, advocated in 2009 in the Hills Amenity Society draft appraisal for Baldwins Hill, follows growing recent interest in developing land adjacent to the allotments accessed from Monkchester Close, seen by many as the “thin end of a wedge” to begin a case for developing the allotments.

The Conservation Officer, Maria Kitts, and Asst Director for Development Control, Nigel Richardson, supported by Cllrs Caroline Pond and Bob Jennings, are understood to be recommending the move to Cabinet when the Baldwins Hill appraisals are discussed.

Nigel Richardson, has circulated the map (labove) for information.  He said: “At this stage the appraisal has yet to be put forward for Council Cabinet approval and as such, has still to be formally adopted.”   He added that he was “reasonably confident” the Cabinet would accept it.

Welcoming the news, Diane Rhodes, plotholder of the Potato Ground and ex Trustee, said she was “absolutely delighted” with the about-turn by the Council and felt this would offer a great deal of important protection against those with thoughts of encroaching on to the site which has such great historic significance and is much valued by today’s plotholders.

Map shows proposed Baldwins Hill Conservation Area including the Potato Grounds and Almshouses at the bottom of Stony Path. Baldwins Hill runs bottom left to top centre

 

The Hills e-newsletter for Spring 2014 is now available online here. We hope to distribute a revised paper version of this over the next couple of weeks.  Subscriptions are now due:  please download the Hills Subscription form.

Hills Picnic this Sunday, Sunday 25 May

Open Meeting and AGM Thurs 29 May 7.30 at The Gardeners Arms:  All Welcome

Decision still waited on Staples Road Primary School extension for 105 more pupils

York Hill and Staples Road Appraisals are approved

ECC change of heart on time of lights out?

Parking remedies to be announced soon

New Hills building boom promises disruption

·        Woodbury Hill scene changer plan for new house and contemporary extension

·         Bid for extra floors on York Crescent flats

·        Big Plan for Baldwins Hill home

·         Triangle of development for Pump Hill/Queens Road

·         Why do you live here? – A personal plea

·         Plan to rebuild gable Lodge

…and York Hill pothole filled at last!

 

at The Gardeners Arms, York Hill

at 7.30pm

Topics will include planning proposals, lighting,

Staples Road School, planning, issues—and the  picnic

Patricia Moxley will speak on why we need trees

 

ALL HILLS RESIDENTS VERY WELCOME TO ATTEND

 

Remember that happy Bank Holiday picnic last summer?

Let’s have a picnic!

Sun 25 May

12-4pm

It’s that time of year again! The bank holiday Sunday will be another opportunity to hang out the flags on York Hill Green. Epping Forest Commissioners and the police have approved the closure of roads at the top of York Hill from 12.00 noon to 4pm. So bring out the chairs, rugs and pack your picnic hampers.

After last year’s fun you don’t need a better excuse to enjoy your Sunday afternoon with friends and join us on the green and in the Gardeners Arms.
It’s entirely FREE so just turn up and enjoy. And if you would like to take part by offering cakes for charity, face painting or help put up flags please contact stephenmcohen@hotmail.com

 

 

Working Party will now seek meeting to discuss action plan

Two of the three appraisals of the Hills Conservation Areas have now been approved for publication by Epping Forest District Council—six years after work began by a special committee of the Hills Amenity Society to draft them.

Conservation Area Officer Maria Kitts announced the good news in an email to Ian Locks who chaired the working party which met over a two year period.

Ms Kitts explained Internal debates about levels of responsibility led to the decision that character appraisals had to be authorised by Cabinet, rather than by a Planning Committee.

Said Ms Kitts: “The good news is that the Staples Road and York Hill Character Appraisals have been officially published, as agreed by Cabinet last month. I have been hanging fire because the documents are with a printing firm as we speak and so I don’t yet have any hard copies, which are due in the next few working days.

“Electronic copies of the appraisals will be uploaded to the website asap and I will be writing to all the residents to inform them of where they can view the published appraisals.”

The Baldwins Hill Character Appraisal, and a request to create an Article 4 Direction, will be put before the next Cabinet meeting in June as there is not one in May due to the council elections.

All three appraisals were revised by the Council before publication but with some of our major proposals omitted.

However the council has agreed to meet representatives of the Hills to discuss some of the key recommendations by the Hills working party.  These included the introduction of a 20mph speed limit throughout the conservation areas and the extension to York and Baldwins Hills of what is known as the Article Four Direction which applies in Staples Road and particularly applies to changes to frontages and boundary markers.

The main purpose of the Appraisals is to protect the status of the conservation areas and provide a reference point for future planning approvals.

After a relatively quiet few years a spate of major new projects is threatening to disrupt the area once again in future years including the pulling down and rebuilding of Mulberry and the possibility of a new house and major extension to Woodberrie, both in Woodbury Hill. A similar concentration of projects applies at the top of Queens Road and in Pump Hill.  See “Three in a Row” on our website.

The Baldwins Hill Appraisal is likely to be the most radical with the introduction of an Article Four Direction which will bring in tight new controls to road boundaries and the fronts of properties.

Once formally adopted, residents would be notified by post and the document would be published online, as well as hard copies being made available at the Civic Offices.

Said Maria Kitts: “I am working on the creation of an Article 4 Direction for Baldwins Hill which will be accompanied by letters/leaflets to the residents explaining the document and specifying the period of time during which they can make representations. If all goes to plan, it is possible that Baldwins Hill will also be considered at the next DDCC meeting.”

Ian Locks, who chaired the working group which prepared the three appraisals, said: “This is so long awaited – but perhaps even more welcome because of that.  We very much hope the adoption of these reports will help to maintain the character of the three conservation areas.  Always remembering, of course, that the purpose is not to prevent change –rather to try to ensure that change enhances rather than diminishes the amenities, character and appearance of at least the three conserved areas.”

Local authorities have a duty to formulate and publish proposals for the preservation and enhancement of their conservation areas and to this effect would normally draw up a character appraisal defining what special characteristics that area has, noting buildings and features of importance and identifying possible ways in which the area might be further enhanced in the future.

Once approved and published the document can then be used for all manner of useful purposes including increasing public awareness of the area’s special character, providing a useful tool to guide future development in the area.

 

 

Switch off and on to match train times?

Essex County Council is keeping under review its decision to switch off streetlights across the county. This began as between midnight and 5am and is currently 1am to 5am.

Loughton Residents Association representative on the council, councillor Chris Pond, and Loughton Town Council had been pressing the county council to allow the lights to remain on everywhere in Loughton until 15 minutes after the last train arrives and to come on again 15 minutes before the first train in the mornings in recognition of the fact that Loughton’s economy and social life is firmly attuned to public transport times.

This was something also suggested by many residents who filled in the Hills Amenity Society questionnaire on the subject of part night lighting last year.

Councillor Pond said while he would welcome the change of turn off time from midnight to 1am, a subsequent later switch on at 6am would still not be convenient for those heading to work early on dark mornings in winter months.

He said: “The lights off time was changed to 1-5 during late April. That’s fine, BUT of course it has been light by 5 in May. The real test will be when early risers set off for work in September, not to mention November.

The bus stops served by early and late buses should remain protected by virtue of my agreement with the Council.”

Currently, other than where roads meet the county council’s strict exception criteria (i.e. the High Road and around roundabouts) or where there are legal or technical constraints preventing part night switch off (currently areas including a part of Staples Road, Englands Lane and Smarts Lane), lights are now out between midnight and 5am.

Anyone with queries about the switch off in their street can contact Essex County Council’s Customer Services Department via email at cs.comments@essex.gov.uk or write to: Customer Services, Essex Highways, PO Box 11, County Hall, Chelmsford, Essex CM1 1LX.

We’ll let you know via the HAS website when we hear more. www.hillsamenitysociety.co.uk

Although the 9 December date for Lights Out in the Hills was delayed until after the Christmas and New Year period, the regime of darkness between the hours of midnight and 5am was in force until April.

So far no horror stories have reached the Hills Amenity Society about incidents resulting from the darkness despite mixed feelings towards the policy expressed by some residents who had raised concerns about increased crime including burglaries and vandalism, and personal safety.

The policy of switching the streetlights off overnight is part of a nationwide move by councils to cut carbon emissions as well as to make financial savings. The lights that remain on are those in the town centre around retail and banking facilities and those at transport interchanges such as roundabouts.

The roll out of the policy in the Loughton area followed a pilot study in Maldon and Uttlesford by Essex County Council which reported no increase in crime levels in those areas as a result of part night lighting. There was also no demonstrable increase in road collisions.

It’s worth knowing that Essex County Council says on its website that Essex Police can ask for lights to be turned back on if they can demonstrate that there had been a significant increase in crime due to the introduction of part night lighting in an area. They won’t however, consider requests from individuals/members of the public.

 

 

Consultation period will follow publication

Following last year’s parking consultation with residents, the North Essex Parking Partnership have identified several parking issues in the Hills area and intend to publish plans to resolve these shortly before a consultation period on the changes.

A residents’ parking permit scheme was decided against as a remedy to current problems after the initial consultation. Instead, residents identified key areas that needed attention through more targeted, smaller scale restrictions such as double yellow lines in key areas.

Details have not yet been finalised but Shane Taylor at the North Essex Parking Partnership said

“It is envisaged that the planning for those roads will be completed and finalised shortly after the Easter break which will provide adequate time for the commencement of the consultation period.

Our pictures show some of
the parking by selfish drivers
around York Hill and Staples Road

“The changes will be advertised once they are ready which will include an official consultation period where comments, including objections could be heard.”

Thank you to all Hills residents who participated in the North Essex Parking Partnership’s residents’ parking survey. It has helped the partnership to understand and deal with the parking issues in the area.  The partnership has informed Loughton Council that most people voted against implementing residents’ parking. Therefore, residents’ parking will not be put in place. Instead, residents reported specific problems that they felt would not be solved by introducing residents’ permits. Following this feedback the partnership will be implementing specific parking restrictions to deal with these reported problems. No details have been decided yet but we will keep you informed.

During the consultation stage, the Hills Committee met with Technical Team Leader Shane Taylor of the North Essex Parking Partnership to discuss proposals for residents’ parking restrictions in the Staples Road, Queens Road and York Hill areas on 16 April.  The meeting was also attended by County Councillor Chris Pond among a limited number of invited representatives.

Shane told the committee that the residents parking proposal had come about as a result of  specific complaints being made by a number of residents.  In particular these concerned cars parking at the bottom of Forest Way causing obstruction to vehicles entering and exiting the road;  parking and waiting vehicles at the bottom of York Hill causing obstructions in the road and on the pavement; and congestion and illegal parking on Staples road and School Green due to school traffic.

‘None of these issues would be resolved by a residents’ parking scheme’

He said that in his professional opinion none of these issues would be resolved by a residents’ parking scheme.

In discussion potential solutions for these specific complaints were discussed.  These might include double yellow lines at bottom of road Forest Way. Double yellow lines and enforcement by parking authorities and police at the bottom of York hill.  However based on revidence from other schools there was no real solution to the problem of parking around the school, particularly at dropping off and picking up times.

Issues around shoppers parking in Staples Road  and  the junction of Pump Hill and Queen’s Road along with a general problem of not enough spaces for residents had led NEPP in consultation with Epping Forest District Council to propose residents’ parking along with particular measures such as yellow lines.

There was consensus in the meeting that residents parking would not solve the issues raised.  Some issues such as general overcrowding could not be solved like this as the vast majority of the cars are owned by residents. Shane agreed with this assessment.

It was agreed that commuter parking was not the issue in this area at the moment.  Other localised issues such as Forest Way and Pump Hill could be solved by yellow lines and the school problem was best addressed by working with the school. Chris Pond, Shane Taylor and Alison Trauttmansdorff, a school governor, agreed to talk to the school to raise this.

Shane explained the proposal process and noted that the proposal would be based on the feedback he received. Residents’ parking may not be imposed if  the conclusion is that it would not help.

The current ‘informal’ consultation stage was being held before any decisions on a solution had been made. NEPP would not start to design the scheme until all residents  had been given the opportunity to voice opinions. Any resulting scheme would be based on this feedback.

Important residents make opinions known

This meant it was important that residents made their opinions known now at the ‘informal’ questionnaire stage so NEPP could make a decision on whether there should be full residents’ parking or a scheme more appropriate to the area’s needs.

If the majority of residents did want some form of parking restrictions (residents parking or otherwise) NEPP would  advertise the proposal with full details to all residents and there would be 21 days to object to any detail. The proposal would then be redesigned to resolve outstanding issues.

Shane told the committee that NEPP and LRA were very conscious of conservation needs of the area. Any implementation would have to take this into account and all residents, the Hills Society and the district council would have the opportunity to comment on any proposal.

It was also mentioned that residents’ parking or restriction in general could lead to residents creating more drive ways and removing protected hedges etc, meaning that the area would lose its feel and become harder to conserve.

Residents parking would potentially mean a need for pay and display or waiting bays but NEPP would endeavour to keep street furniture and markings to a minimum, such as signs only at the entrances to the area.

There was no set timeline for implementation. The larger the proposal the longer it would take. If a small solution of only double yellow lines in certain places were adopted then this would take less time to put in place.

If no proposal was taken forward it was not unusual for an area  not to be considered for another five years  because of limited resources. But at the same time it was important to make the right decision so residents did not have to live with restrictions that were a disadvantage to the area for the next five years.

Stephen Cohen, chairman-elect of the committee said: “It is hoped this information will help residents make a decision and residents  are urged to reply to the questionnaire and give their feedback at this stage so the most appropriate action can be taken. Please share this information with fellow residents.”

Questions and answers

Shane Taylor had previously  responded to questions put to him by the Hills committee (in green)

1. Could you give a brief outline of the steps to the whole process, including the ‘informal’ and ‘formal’ stages and highlighting at what steps:

At this current time we are merely ascertaining the general views/opinions regarding the introduction of a residents parking scheme or leaving things as they are. Depending on the results of the survey, we will then decide, in conjunction with the District Council if a scheme will be progressed to an official design stage or if no further action will be taken.

If majority support is available we would then arrange for the necessary advertising and formal consultation which would involve lettering residents again with details of a scheme, including information such as the position of signs and lines for example. This period lasts for 21 days and objections are viewed and answered within this time period. If objections are received they would be considered and if necessary amendments to a plan may be required. If amendments were considered to be above and beyond those planned then re-advertising would need to occur and a further 21 day consultation period adhered to. As you can see this can “drag” the time that schemes take to implement considerably and in some cases, schemes may be withdrawn if too many objections are received. If we advertise our intention to install a scheme or restrictions, after successfully answering objections but a party is still not happy with our response or plans they can challenge this in the High Court in the form of a judicial review. As you can see these matters can become quite complicated and there are numerous scenarios which can occur. We are not legally obliged to install restrictions or schemes however we can be legally challenged once we state our intentions to complete work. If we successfully answer objections and are not challenged we then advertise the fact that we intend to install a scheme etc which would then lead to the installation of the design elements such as signs and lines and enforcement would occur once this has been completed.

2. Will residents be able to feedback and vote on the project continuing/residents parking being implemented?

This will depend on the results of the survey which is currently being conducted and this is seen as an opportunity to have a say on whether further investigation/work is warranted.

3. Will Epping Council be able to input on conservation requirements?

This would need to be considered if a scheme is progressed.

4.Please explain the context of what is being proposed – why it is being proposed and the sorts of complaints you were receiving

We have received complaints from various parties from a number of the roads being surveyed and need to consider the area holistically as restrictions in one road will affect others if they too are not included. Complaints relate to access issues for larger vehicles, driveway/road obstructions/non resident based parking/school based parking
5.  Will there be an opportunity for an alternative solution to be considered if residents’ parking is not found to be appropriate. Would this opportunity be available if residents vote no at this stage?

Unfortunately we have consulted with the District Council and ward members and the two options detailed on the questionnaire are seen as the only two available in this scenario. Our work has had to gain the approval of the parking partnership board (consists of Harlow, Tendring, Braintree, Epping Forest, Uttlesford District Councils & Colchester Borough Council) due to the significant work required. Similar consultations have occurred elsewhere and future work is very much controlled by the responses we receive. We may consider nominal changes in locations where additional lines may be needed to prevent any parking such as the entrance to Forest Way and certain parts of York Hill.

 

Six areas targeted by developers

If you were in any doubt that recession has turned to property boom, look no further than the Hills as development problems—blocked an muddy roads, noise, mess—loom again for residents in six areas which in particular can expect disruption over the next few years:  the top of Queens Road round into Pump Hill; Woodbury Hill (again); Baldwins Hill opposite the hollow; Staples Road around the school; York Hill near School Green; and, for good measure, the bottom of Church Hill.  See our website for personal views—and we are happy to add yours if you send them to the Editor at i.locks@btinternet.com.

See also “Three in a row”

Scene-changing plans for Woodbury Hill

This and other illustrations for the plans to develop Woodberrie, the corner plot at the junction of Woodberrie and Kings Hill, can be seen on the Epping Forest District website here.  The existing house is in the centre with the new four-bedroom house on the left  and the contemporary extension, linked by a walkway, on the right.

Plans have been lodged with the District Council for a major development at Woodberrie, on the corner of  Woodbury Hill and Kings Hill. On the east side are plans for a major new house (left in the artist’s impression below) while on the west side a “contemporary extension” is planned. The development would dramatically change the street view in the very narrow , holly-hedge bounded lane which is Woodbury Hill.  Plans can be seen at EPF/0894/14 on the council’s website and comments should be lodged by 25 May. This will be the fifth application to build on the site. See Hills website for personal comment.

See also “A Personal View”

Extra floor wanted for York Crescent blocks

Following strong objections by residents, plans to add an additional floor to two of the five flat blocks in York Hill Crescent  have been rejected by Epping Forest District Council against officer recommendation.

Four one-bedroom flats would be added to the 1920s-built development.

Many residents of the blocks objected primarily on the grounds of the disruption that would be caused during building works, the impact on their properties and concerns about parking.  No new parking provision was proposed in an area where this is already a big concern.

There are a number of garages on the development but these are not necessarily occupied by tenants of flats but instead rented to private individuals and residents regularly do battle with school traffic in the mornings and vehicles parking for Fifteen in the evenings to find a parking space in the area for their cars.

Loughton Town Council also objected to the plans which it considered an over intensification of a plot at a sensitive location on the edge of a conservation area and again raised concerns about the lack of parking in an already congested area.

However, the council officers’ report said that the proposed development was in an “urban area” where new housing was needed and difficult to provide. They suggested conditions to keep disturbance during works to a minimum and said that it was reasonable in an urban area not to provide parking.

A decision on whether to appeal against the decision is awaited from the applicants.

Gable Lodge to make way for new homes?

Gable Lodge, the former Bupa Care Home on the corner of Church Hill and St John’s Road, could be demolished and the site redeveloped to provide 11 retirement homes for the over 55s.

An application has been submitted to Epping Forest District Council on behalf of Ortus Homes, a division of McCarthy and Stone, to demolish the existing buildings on the site and erect a new three storey building providing 11 two-bedroom apartments and associated facilities.

If successful the plans would mark a departure for McCarthy and Stone from their more usual business of providing sheltered housing accommodation. The flats would be aimed at ‘a younger retiree’.

The 0.4 acre site features a number of mature conifer trees and is subject to a blanket Tree Preservation Order.

A decision is expected by mid-May.

BIG plans for 5 Baldwins Hill

At 5 Baldwins Hill an application EPF/0407/14 for an underground addition to an earlier proposal has been refused. The outline to the adjacent property in the diagram (left) gives a clue to the size of the extension, marked by darker lines, which received permission over a year ago.  The owners now have to decide whether to proceed with the plans already approved or appeal the refusal of the new further enlarged scheme.

Three in a Row

A desirable location to live, The Hills area is always busy with builders and developers improving, extending, and occasionally, where space is available, building new homes.

The upper part of Pump Hill and the top of Queens Road could be facing disruption with a combination of new or unexpired planning consents for three neighbouring sites.

Permission was granted in the middle of January this year for a four bedroom home on the vacant plot of land at the top of Pump Hill (a site known as numbers 12-18) where a black weatherboarded property had once stood until demolished in the 1930s.

(HAS were grateful to the applicant for the opportunity to comment on his proposal before it was submitted to planners and also grateful that our suggestions concerning appearance, materials and scale were taken on board.)

Next door at number 10 Pump Hill permission was given in October 2013 for a two-storey rear extension.

And literally just around the corner at 78 Queens Road planning permission for a two storey side and front extension plus single storey rear extension was granted in 2003. This has been part implemented and the remaining works could be undertaken at any time – perhaps imminently as new approvals for amendments to the roof design (the inclusion of three rear dormers and front and side roof light windows plus the raising of the front gable) were granted in January and April of this year.

With the Queens Road development able to be completed at any time plus a standard three year time limit for the commencement of works that comes with the planning consents for the two schemes in Pump Hill, there is a risk that all the works with their related deliveries will overlap – a hat trick maybe, but perhaps not a cause for celebration in our narrow roads.

A personal view by one of those whose home would affected by development in Woodbury Hill

Q. “WHY DO YOU LIVE HERE?”

“I live here because … it has stunning views, it is a conservation area, the ambience, the history, the hills, high holly hedgerows, narrow country lanes, the interesting mix of attractive property, great pubs, the sense of space, sense of community, the forest and accessbility to London …”

We are all here in the Conservation area for a mix of the reasons above.  All of which are subjective and easily eroded.

I live in a weatherboarded cottage (one of a pair) in Woodbury Hill which is a beautiful narrow lane set high on a ridge.  My family love it.  But this week, I received notification of a planning application, as I expect others did, to build a rather large executive house within the garden owned by Woodberrie.  They have also applied to build a contemporary block / annexe to the main house (the size of a 3rd property).

This is the third attempt for development in the garden over the years.  Ironically, the first of which was vigorously objected to by the current owners when they lived in a neighbouring property.

The application mentions the spectacular views over Epping Forest and London’s skyline (the new executive house will be afforded).  These will have been stolen from all the immediate surrounding properties.

Parking will be a concern with a new 4/5 bedroom house.  It is very limited here.  And the proposed new entrance is on a very narrow part of Woodbury Hill and close to a bend.  A bit of a blind spot.

The street scene on Woodbury Hill will be irrevocably and dramatically changed and I feel, NOT for the better.

I am not against development.  Far from it.  All areas change and move on.  However, this area has been designated a conservation area and as such, any developments have to enhance and improve the nature of the environment.  Southbank is an excellent example of being both sympathetic and contemporary.

Will the proposals by Woodberrie meet the criteria for the Conservation Area? I firmly believe the answer is a resounding NO.  Indeed, it will have a detrimental impact.

In my family’s view, this application must be stopped.

So I come back again to my original question, why do we live here?

 

 

 

 

 

 

A spring for ground water after heavy rain

According  to the gangmen this was a “real beauty” – the deep chasm which opened up in York Hill months back and was part of the council annual pre-election pothole programme.  When it rained the hole again became  an outlet for groundwater but the new filling survived—for now.

We have reported the problem  to Essex County Council using their report website https://secureweb1.essexcc.gov.uk/

Highways/Report-a-highway-problem.