Decision details

The Development Management Lead delivered her team’s report. 

The Chair thanked the officer and invited Ian Oldfield, local resident, to speak against the application.

Ian Oldfield introduced himself and stated he was there to represent the local residents.  He stated that there were 55 objections, in addition to a professional assessment from Chartered Planners Bell Cornwall, which judged the development as not meeting the required standard.  He continued to say that the pack had many errors, that it was non-compliant and that its construction would negatively affect the local residents.  He highlighted difficulties in access to the bins, refuse bin areas, and highlighted issues with access for the emergency services.  Mr Oldfield believed that Hertfordshire Fire Service had not been given the correct information.  In addition to this, he highlighted issues with on street parking.  Mr Oldfield finished by stating that the aesthetics were grim and unappealing, while the report was full of factual inaccuracies and non-compliance.

The Chair thanked Mr Oldfield and asked the Development Management Lead to comment on two of the points; waste disposal and access for fire appliances.

The Development Management Lead responded that the original bin store plan had been shown to contain two large industrial wheelie bins; the plans had been amended to show normal residential bins in the store and an amended door.  It was felt this was a more appropriate bin type.  She indicated that the store itself had not been changed.  In relation to the bins, the transport impact had to be considered and if it were likely, they would end up on the road or pavement causing a blockage. It had been deemed that this was unlikely to happen.  In respect of the access road, she stated that the issues raised in relation to fire safety only applied to developments over 80 metres in height and therefore were not applicable in this case. Despite that, highways and the fire service had been consulted and had stated that fire vehicles could fit through the access. Furthermore, she stated that time considerations for emergency access could not be considered under this application.

The Chair thanked the Development Management Lead and invited Alex Richards to speak in favour of the application.

Alex Richards stated the applicant had engaged with council officers and outlined the pre-qualifying criteria that had been considered.  He pointed out that the site was suitable for being car-free and no objections from highways had been raised.  The applicant considered the design to be sensitive and stated it would be constructed of high-quality materials that would stand the test of time and would enhance the overall image of the blocks. A detailed day/sun light survey had been completed which stated that there would not be an issue.  He continued that construction management had been a key consideration and it was recognised that this would need to be completed within three years.  He finished by stating that the development would deliver new housing in a sustainable location and that the application was now compliant.

The Chair thanked Alex Richards and invited Councillor Tom Osborn, a local councillor, to speak in relation to the application.

Councillor Osborn stated that he would not repeat the points previously made, but was there to represent the views of constituents.  He commented that zinc cladding would clash with the building’s current design and the other buildings in the local area.  He also stressed that it was not sympathetic to the current building.  He did not believe it complied with prior approval legislation and felt that the access road was not appropriate.  He indicated another application that had been refused due to Hertfordshire Fire and Rescue’s concerns over access.   Additionally, he objected to the change in the style of bins.  He finished by stating that the current government planning framework was not the answer to the housing problems faced nationally.  

The Chair thanked Councillor Osborn.  The Chair then highlighted three issues: transport and highways impact, the external impact of the development and the impact on existing amenities, that could be considered in the decision-making process.  He went on to outline the powers of the committee and listed various other organisations and processes that were also involved in the development process and could be appealed to.  He detailed some of the powers of these other groups.  He then invited the committee to comment on the application.

Several members of the committee commented that they sympathised with residents but had to make their decision based on planning reasons alone and leave emotion out of the equation.  A number also commented that the aesthetics were unappealing.  

The Chair thanked the councillors and added comments in relation to the appearance stating that he thought it was okay, and stated that in Watford it was possible to find similar buildings.  The material that was being proposed was something that could be refined and was subject to approval by officers. He did not object to the aesthetics.  There were other zinc cladding buildings in Watford.  He believed the impact on neighbouring buildings would be slight.   The Chair went on to say that as much as possible the committee had to deal with quantifiable facts, not just personal opinions or whether they liked it or not.  He stated there were no sound planning reasons to refuse the application.

The Chair moved for the committee to vote on the officer’s recommendation.

On being put to the committee, the application was approved.

RESOLVED –

The application complies with the conditions and limitations of the regulations under Schedule 2, Part 20, Class A of the General Permitted Development Order and Prior Approval is therefore granted subject to conditions.

Conditions

In addition to the conditions set out in paragraph A.2 of Part 20 Class A of the GPDO, a condition to require the development to be carried out in accordance with the approved plans is necessary in the interests of certainty. Furthermore, a pre-commencement condition to require details of the external materials of the development to be submitted for approval is necessary to ensure that high quality materials would be used, in the interests of the character and appearance of the area.

1. The development must be completed within a period of 3 years starting with the date prior approval is granted.

2. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans:

22027S PL 01.01 Rev A; 22027S PL 01.02; 22027S PL 01.03 Rev B; 22027S PL 02.01; 22027S PL 02.02; 22027S PL 02.03 Rev D; 22027S PL 02.04 Rev D; 22027S PL 03.01; 22027S PL 04.01; 22027S PL 04.02; 22027S PL 04.03 Rev B; 22027S PL 04.04 Rev B.

3. No development shall commence until full details of the materials to be used on the external surfaces of the development hereby approved have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

4. Before beginning the development, the developer must provide the local planning authority with a report for the management of the construction of the development which sets out the proposed development hours of operation and how any adverse impact of noise, dust, vibration and traffic on occupiers of the building and adjoining owners or occupiers will be mitigated.

5. The developer must notify the local planning authority of the completion of the development as soon as practicable after completion and the notification must be made in writing and include the name of the developer, the address or location of the development and the date of completion.

6. Each new dwellinghouse is to remain in use as a dwellinghouse within the meaning of Class C3 of the Schedule to the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987 (as amended) and for no other purpose, except to the extent that the other purpose is ancillary to the primary use as a dwellinghouse.