9.14/0060/FUL- Upgrade the outfield by reshaping it to solve drainage issue and manage surface water flows and create an attractive outfield with contoured grass target greens. Manage the water via a rainwater harvesting scheme to be stored in a new pond to the north of the outfield for re-use in the summer for irrigation. The installation of the storage pond represents a change of use in the northern field at OXHEY GOLF RANGE, PRESTWICK ROAD, WATFORD, WD19 7EX for Oxhey Park Golf Club
(DCES)
Parish:Watford Rural / Ward:Oxhey HallExpiry Statutory Period:15 April 2014 / Officer:Joanna Bowyer
Recommendation: That Planning Permission be granted subject to conditions.
This application is brought before the Committee as the landowner is Three Rivers District Council.
1.Relevant Planning History
1.18/282/90 - 9 Hole golf course and driving range and ancillary buildings – Permitted 12.07.90.
1.28/264/91 - Golf course and driving range and ancillary buildings – Permitted 22.07.91.
1.38/265/91 - Erection of clubhouse and associated car parking – Permitted 25.07.91.
1.48/686/91 - Extension to height of fence to golf driving range – Permitted 23.03.92.
1.58/688/91 - Erection of temporary portacabin for use as clubhouse – Permitted 05.12.91.
1.699/01240/FUL – Remodelling of existing golf driving range and additional safety fencing along Prestwick Road as well as improvements to the golf course – Permitted 22.07.99.
1.702/01316/FUL – 20m high lattice tower and 6 duel band plane polar antenna and 4 microwave dishes with 10equipment cabins – Refused 28.11.02.
1.812/1879/PREAPP - Upgrade the outfield by reshaping it to manage surface water flows and create an attractive outfield with contoured grass target greens. Manage the water via a rainwater harvesting scheme to be stored in a new pond to the north of the outfield for re use in the summer for irrigation – Closed 05.11.12.
Summary of Response: Concerns were raised over the increase in land levels proposed which would significantly reduce views across the site with an adverse impact on the openness of the Green Belt. Concerns were also raised over the quality of fill material brought onto the site.
Officer Note: The level changes have been significantly reduced and some further information provided in relation to the fill material.
1.913/0664/FUL - Upgrade the outfield by reshaping it to solve drainage issue and manage surface water flows and create an attractive outfield with contoured grass target greens. Manage the water via a rainwater harvesting scheme to be stored in a new pond to the north of the outfield for re-use in the summer for irrigation. The installation of the storage pond represents a change of use in the northern field – Withdrawn 17.07.13.
2.Site Description
2.1The application site has an area of approximately 2.6ha and consists of a golf driving range on the east side of Prestwick Road, South Oxhey with an area of open grassland to the north. The site is located within the Metropolitan Green Belt.
2.2The driving range includes a club house and covered driving range bays which are both single storey structures, however, with the exception of the eastern-most section of the covered driving range bays, these buildings are not included within the application site red line. Similarly, the gravel car park to the south of the buildings is not included within the application site, although the vehicular access to the site and car park from Prestwick Road and an area of grass to the east of the car park is within the application site.
2.3To the east of the site is a woodland area known as Hartsbourne Wood which slopes down from the application site towards Right of Way Watford Rural 007 and a small stream with the railway line situated on an embankment further to the east of the site.
2.4To the west of the application site is Prestwick Road and beyond this to the west is a 9 hole golf course which is a pay and play facility available to the general public.
2.5The majority of the application site consists of the outfield for the golf driving range. The outfield slopes gently from west to east with a fall of approximately 1m across the site and does include some range/distance markers. To the boundary of the outfield with Prestwick Road there is high wire mesh fencing.
2.6To the north of the outfield is an open field which is currently unused and unmaintained. This field slopes with a fall of approximately 4m from south to north. The boundary of this northern field is formed by mature trees and vegetation with a low level bund structure.
2.7Overhead power lines run across the site and there is a pylon situated towards the north of the outfield.
2.8During the site visit, it was noted that there were significant waterlogged areas across the outfield, particularly adjacent to the west boundary of the site.
- Description of Proposed Development
3.1Full planning permission is sought for the upgrading of the existing outfield by reshaping to solve drainage issues and manage surface water and to create contoured target greens. It is also proposed to install an irrigation pond to the north of the site to store rainwater which can then be used for irrigation.
3.2The submitted Design and Access Statement states that there is a need to significantly improve the drainage characteristics of the outfield, whilst also considering ease of maintenance and aesthetic appearance.
3.3It is proposed to re-profile the outfield which would involve the construction of new slopes, banking and target greens. In addition to the re-profiling, it is proposed to increase the length of the outfield by 35 metres from 209 metres to 246 metres. The Design and Access Statement refers to a ‘basin’ with the highest points around the perimeter of the outfield and the low points along the centre.This is designed to shed water towards the water harvesting network and also directs practice balls away from the perimeter. The amended contours would be formed from WRAP Quality Protocol Materials (non-waste soils). Existing ground levels would be increased between approximately 0.5m and 1.5m with a maximum of 2m in some places. This would include banking on the western boundary of the outfield adjacent to Prestwick Road. A network of sub surface drainage pipes will also be installed; these would be positioned between 0.4 and 0.7 metres below the surface.
3.4In addition to improving the drainage of the outfield, it is intended that the works would create a dual purpose outfield which would provide a practice area whilst also acting as a run-off catchment zone. The Design and Access Statement states that; “Gentle undulations around the green targets will not only serve as important drainage routes but will also frame the proposed green complexes and improve the overall practice experience”. Water collected from slopes and subsurface drains within the outfield would be fed back to the proposed water storage pond at the north of the outfield.
3.5The water storage pond would be sited in an area which currently comprises an unmaintained/overgrown grass area. It would have a maximum length of approximately 67 metres and maximum width of approximately 18 metres and could accommodate 1000 cubic metres of water. It would be lined with a synthetic butyl liner.
3.6When required, water from the pond would be pumped back to the existing holding tank near the existing buildings, before being distributed to the golf course opposite via an existing irrigation water supply under Prestwick Road.
3.7The submitted Design and Access Statement states the pond will be constructed through a mixture of cutting into the existing ground and earth bunding above it.The bunding would be derived from a combination of onsite excavated material and imported WRAP Quality Protocol materials (non-waste soils). The surrounding banks would be planted with marginal aquatics, wildflowers, native grasses, trees and shrubs. Around the storage pond would be green chainlink fencing 2.5m high.
3.8Adjacent to the existing building and water holding tank, an attenuation basin is proposed. This would hold any excess water (e.g. during a peak rainfall event) which would overflow from the holding tank into the attenuation basin. Should the attenuation basin fill up, excess water would run over the slip way and discharge via a pipe into the adjacent Oxhey Brook. Following the works, the construction access would be reinstated as a putting green to the south east of the covered bays.
3.93m high netting would be reinstated to the east boundary of the outfield and there would be additional landscaping to the site.
3.10The application is accompanied by the following reports:
- Walkover Ecological Assessment
- Flood Risk Assessment
- Design and Access Statement
- Planning Statement
- Temporary Construction Access Scoping Report.
4.Consultation
4.1.StatutoryConsultation
4.1.1Affinity Water: You should be aware that the proposed development site is located close to or within an Environment Agency defined groundwater Source Protection Zone (GPZ) corresponding to Eastbury Pumping Station. This is a public water supply, comprising a number of Chalk abstraction boreholes, operated by Affinity Water Ltd.
The construction works and operation of the proposed development site should be done in accordance with the relevant British Standards and Best Management Practices, thereby significantly reducing the groundwater pollution risk. It should be noted that the construction works may exacerbate any existing pollution. If any pollution is found at the sites then the appropriate monitoring and remediation methods will need to be undertaken.
For further information we refer you to CIRIA Publication C532 "Control of water pollution from construction - guidance for consultants and contractors".
4.1.2British Pipeline Agency: No response received.
4.1.3Environment Agency (Initial Comments): Thank you for consulting us on the above application. We object to the proposed development because the applicant has provided insufficient information on the materials being imported for landscaping or the risks posed to highly sensitive ground and surface water supplies.
The site is located in Source Protection Zone 1, an area of high groundwater vulnerability, for a significant public drinking water abstraction. The site is on a largely unconfined Principal Chalk Aquifer, with high groundwater levels and the adjacent Hearts Bourne ‘main river’. In terms of water setting, the site is amongst the most sensitive in the country.
It is a shame that the applicant did not continue to engage with us following our objection to a similar application in May 2013 (your reference: 13/0664/FUL) and their subsequent enquiry to us in October 2013, before submitting this application. In our response to the applicant in October, we expressed concerns that they had provided insufficient information to import material using the CL:AIRE code of practice (CoP) protocol.
In this application, the nature of the material that is being imported is unclear. The applicant states in their Design & Access Statement that they intend to import the material using WRAP protocol, but this protocol cannot be used for the required material. The applicant has indicated elsewhere that they may seek a permit from us to import the material. Any import that requires a permit will fall under our landfilling criteria and we will be unlikely to grant a permit in such a sensitive location.
Environmental Permit issues
Any proposed landfill operation will require a bespoke permit under Schedule 10 of the Environmental Permitting Regulations 2010. We do not believe it is appropriate for this location, having regard to the effects of pollution to ground and surface waters when taking account of the potential sensitivity of the surrounding area to adverse effects from pollution.
The proposed development is located within Source Protection Zone 1 (SPZ1). Landfill sites located within SPZ1 pose a hazard to groundwater quality and risk pollutants entering our drinking water. This position is supported by our Groundwater Protection: Principles and Practice document, position statement E1.
We do not believe the applicant for the proposal will be able to demonstrate that the development can be achieved whilst protecting the environment. It is therefore very unlikely that the proposal will receive an environmental permit from us.
Objection
We object to the proposed development as submitted because there is insufficient information to demonstrate that the risk of pollution to controlled waters is acceptable. There are two strands to this objection. These are that:
• We consider the level of risk posed by this proposal to be unacceptable.
• The application fails to provide assurance that the risks of pollution are understood, as a preliminary risk assessment (including a desk study, conceptual model and initial assessment of risk) has not been provided. It requires a proper assessment whenever there might be a risk, not only where the risk is known.
Reasons The site is located in Source Protection Zone 1 over a mainly unconfined Principal Chalk Aquifer. Ensuring groundwater quality is maintained and improved (where required) is of great importance at this location because these aquifers play a nationally important role in providing drinking water.
Typically these developments will require an agreed risk assessment which forms the basis of materials acceptance under the CL:AIRE CoP. As we have previously indicated, this site is not suitable for an import under the CL:AIRE CoP because of the sensitivity of the site and the lack of clarity regarding quality of the materials or waste being brought on to site.
Permitting options for this development would also be limited due to the Landfill policy E1 in GP3 which requires us to object to any landfill in Source Protection Zone 1. National Planning Policy Framework paragraph 109 states that the planning system should contribute to and enhance the natural and local environment by preventing both new and existing development from contributing to or being put at unacceptable risk from, or being adversely affected by unacceptable levels of water pollution. Paragraph 120 states that local policies and decisions should ensure that new development is appropriate for its location, having regard to the effects of pollution on health or the natural environment, taking account of the potential sensitivity of the area or proposed development to adverse effects from pollution. Government policy also states that planning policies and decisions should also ensure that adequate site investigation information, prepared by a competent person, is presented (NPPF, paragraph 121).
Overcoming our objection
From our initial discussions with the applicant about using CL:AIRE CoP to import materials, insufficient details were provided for the risks to groundwater and the details of the material to be imported. Based on this information, it is unlikely that the applicant can import material using CL:AIRE CoP. The applicant will not be able to import material under an Environmental Permit for the reasons above.
The applicant must demonstrate through a thorough risk assessment that any material to be used for landscaping will not cause a pollution risk, the source of the material, and clarify the protocol by which the material will be imported.
4.1.4Environment Agency (Further Comments 21 February 2014): Thank you for forwarding the letter received from Robert Jameson of Attwaters Jameson Hill Solicitors (dated: 13 February 2014; reference: RAJ.NP.OXHEY GOLF) in response to our objection to the proposed development at OxheyGolfRange. I would like to clarify our position on this matter.
Part of the solicitor’s letter suggests that we “regard [the application] as a landfill proposal”. This is incorrect. We stated that insufficient information has been submitted about the nature of the material and where it is coming from. We reminded the applicant that the importation of any ‘waste’ material would be considered a landfill activity and would be unlikely to gain a permit from us given the sensitivity of the site. We would object to landfill developments in Source Protection Zone (SPZ) 1, therefore the applicant needs to demonstrate that the proposal does not constitute landfill.
The applicant mentioned in their Design and Access Statement that they are considering importing material under the WRAP Protocol. We do not consider that this protocol can be used for the type of material that the applicant will need to import.
The applicant has previously considered importing materials using the CL:AIRE code of practice, but have so far submitted insufficient information to demonstrate that a direct site transfer of material is possible for the proposed donor site and receiver (application) site using this protocol.
Overall, the applicant has submitted insufficient information about the material being imported, the site that the material is being imported from, and the application site. The applicant needs to submit information demonstrating where the proposed infill material is being brought in from (including adequate site investigation details), details of the specific material being brought onto site and a full risk assessment for bringing the materials onto the application site.
I would like to take this opportunity to remind you that because the applicant proposes to bring in material under a protocol that does not require a permit from us (i.e. WRAP or CL:AIRE), it is your responsibility as the Local Authority to ensure that the material being brought onto the site is in line with any planning permission granted.