There were no apologies for absence.

There were no disclosures of interests.

The minutes of the Development Management Committee held on 19 November 2015 to be submitted and signed.

Copies of the minutes of this meeting are usually available seven working days following the meeting.

All minutes are available on the Council’s website.

The minutes of the meeting held on 19 November 2015 were submitted and signed.

Removal of an existing garage/utility extension and construction of a new, one bedroom property.

The Committee received the report of the Senior Planning Officer, including the relevant planning history of the site. 

The Senior Planning Officer introduced the item, explaining that full planning permission was sought for the removal of the existing side extension and garage and the construction of a new one bedroom property.  The application followed two previous applications which sought permission for the creation of a new two story dwelling; both refused planning permission given the impact the development would have on the amount of natural light entering the neighbouring property to the east of the site (79 Cecil Street).  The current scheme differed from those previously submitted in that it proposed a single story building rather than a two story structure.  As a result, the reduced mass of the building allowed a greater amount of natural light to enter the neighbouring property as demonstrated by the Daylight and Sunlight Study that accompanied the application.  It was considered that the current scheme would have no detrimental impact on the living conditions of the occupiers of the neighbouring property; and that in this respect the current proposal had addressed the reasons for refusal that were applied to the previous two applications.  He then went on to read the remainder of the ‘summary’ in the application contained on Page 6 of the report.

The Chair invited Robbie Laird, present on behalf of local residents, to speak to the Committee in objection to the proposed development.

Mr Laird explained that he would be opposing the application from a policy view point.  Firstly, it was considered that parking facilities had not been properly taken in to account.  He made reference to the Watford District Plan 2000, commenting that Policy T22 and the map on page seven, Zone Three had not been adequately considered.  He suggested that cognisance needed to be taken of the implications for parking in relation to people getting to work arising from the new Croxley and the proposed High Speed Two rail links.

He made reference to the spacing and sunlight relating to the proposed development asking why a 25 degree line had been used and referring to the Resident Design Guidance 2004; suggesting that as the entrance to the property was on the side of the house, a 45 degree line would have been more appropriate.  As a result, the light would be reduced. 

Mr Laird asserted that Policy HS3 of the Watford Local Plan Core Strategy 2006-31 had not been taken in to account; in that non affordable housing did not seem to have been considered despite the development being of less than ten dwellings.  He concluded by saying that whilst he was pro-development, he was opposed to this current proposal that, in his view, was ‘piecemeal’ and not at all satisfactory.

The Chair asked the Senior Planning Officer to respond to the questions raised by Mr Laird.

The Senior Planning Officer explained that with regard to:

·        Policy HS3 of the Watford Local Plan Core Strategy 2006-31; this  ...  view the full minutes text for item 46.

Development of 12 three bedroom semi-detached houses, 16 two bedroom flats and associated car parking and landscaping.

The Committee received the report of the Planning Officer, including the relevant planning history of the site and details of responses to the application.

The Planning Officer introduced the item, explaining that full planning permission was sought for the erection of 12 no. three bed semi-detached houses, 16 no. two bed flats and associated car parking and landscaping.  All existing buildings on the site were to be demolished.  The houses were to be erected along the southwest and northwest boundaries with the rear elevations addressing Leveret Close.  The apartment building (four storeys plus roof accommodation and undercroft parking) was to be cited on the eastern corner of the site (adjacent to Kingsway).  Access would be as existing and no direct access to Leveret Close was proposed.  Bin and cycle stores were also incorporated within the parking area.  A total of 34 parking bays were proposed.

The Committee had received a petition submitted by the Chair of Governors at the Leavesden Green School.  However, following legal advice, the ‘petition’, as submitted, could not be considered by Members to be a material consideration in the determination of the application as it did not give actual signatures (only names) and addresses were incomplete.  Furthermore, the petition did not state what it was about and it appeared to have been commenced prior to the North Watford Police Station application being submitted to the Council thereby precluding reconsideration of the application following amendments.

The Chair invited Laura Creed, Chair of Governors, Leavesden Green School, to speak to the Committee in objection to the proposed development.

Ms Creed made reference to the petition that had been prepared in July.  She explained that the main concern in relation to the application was the height of the proposed block of flats; this being of five storeys and overlooking the school.  The block was adjacent to the school fields, with these used daily and with outdoor learning for vulnerable children on a Friday.  She reiterated that there was concern about the height of the fourth and fifth storeys overlooking the school and emphasised that they were keen to keep children safe.  She explained that there were six windows overlooking the school together with balcony’s overlooking the school fields.  She stressed that there was real concern about the proximity of the flats to the school fields.  She concluded by saying that steps should be taken to ensure the flats did not overlook the school fields so as to protect the children.

The Chair invited Gareth Lewis, Watford Community Housing Trust, to speak to the Committee in support of the application.

Mr Lewis explained that the application was in response to the Watford housing crisis.  The site had been acquired by the Trust on the open market.  All 28 units would be ‘affordable’ housing and the submitted scheme was for three bedroom houses and two bedroom flats.  He suggested that the proposed scheme made best use of the topography of the location.  All properties would meet lifetime standards.  The  ...  view the full minutes text for item 47.

Application to discharge Section 106 obligations pursuant to planning permission 07/00611/FUL.

The Committee received the report of the Interim Development Management Section Head.

The Interim Development Management Section Head introduced the item and invited any questions from Members of the Committee.

In response to a series of questions from Councillor Bell, the Interim Development Management Section Head informed the Committee that the loss to the Council was in the region of £25,000; but she was unaware as to why the matter had taken so long to resolve as she was not working in the Council in 2011.  She explained that with the introduction of the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL), a dedicated CIL/S106 officer post had been created to monitor Section 106 obligations and CIL and to pursue any outstanding matters under five years old.

In response to concerns expressed by Councillor Bashir about the loss of taxpayer’s money, the Chair undertook to raise the issue with the head of department to ensure the circumstances did not arise again.

RESOLVED -

That the report be noted.

Report of the Interim Development Management Section Head, providing information on the performance of Development Management with regard to the number of planning applications determined and appeals decided between 1 April 2015 and 13 November 2015.

The Committee received the report of the Interim Development Management Section Head.

The Interim Development Management Section Head introduced the item referring to Table One in the report that demonstrated the achievement of targets and excellent performance by officers.  She added that the ‘approved’ ratings shown were in excess of government requirements; further demonstrating very satisfactory outcomes.  She discussed Table Two in the report making reference to the low level (26 percent) of appeals upheld which again demonstrated very good performance by officers.

Councillor Bashir congratulated those involved for these levels of performance.  He asked whether there was a list of appeals that had emanated from Committee decisions and whether these had been granted or refused.  The Interim Development Management Section Head explained that there had been no such appeals this year. In response to a further question from Councillor Bashir in relation to mechanisms to identify whether officer decisions leading to dismissal could have been dealt with better; the Interim Development Management Section Head explained that all decisions were ‘delegated decisions’.  She said that when analysing the inspector decisions that were upheld, there was a degree of inconsistency in approach so it was difficult to determine commonality.

Councillor Bell congratulated officers on the high levels of performance as shown in the report and suggested that this provided evidence of the pre-application stage working well.

Councillor Sharpe said that it was important that there were such measuring mechanisms and it was good that there was a target around taking decisions.  He wondered where the Council stood in national rankings commenting that previously the Council had been in the top quartile.  He considered the present figures to be a phenomenal effort by officers.  He then discussed issues around appeals, government policy on planning matters and the approach the Committee should take with regard to decision making.

The Chair summarised discussions and complimented officers on their efforts.  He formally thanked the Interim Development Management Section Head (who was shortly to leave the Council) on behalf of the Committee for all of her hard work.  He wished all those present a happy festive season.

RESOLVED -

That the report be noted

Chair

Development Management Committee

The meeting started at 7.30 pm

and ended at 9.00 pm