There were no apologies for absence.

There were no disclosures of interests.

The minutes of the Development Management Committee held on 10 December 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 10 December 2015 were submitted and signed.

Hybrid application to include full planning permission for sound stages, workshops, post production facility and extension to the studio tour car park, together with outline planning permission for extension to the studio tour, workshops, production support building, studio parking deck, studio cafe extension, studio support facilities and associated works.

(Duplicate application to Three Rivers District Council)

The Committee received the report of the Development Management Section Head, including the relevant planning history of the site. 

The Development Management Team Leader introduced the item, explaining that the application straddled the boundary with Watford Borough Council and Three Rivers District Council.  Approximately 90% of the site lay within Three Rivers District Council.  Warner Bros. Studios was proposing a significant expansion of its film studios as well as the Harry Potter tour.  It was a hybrid application, containing both detailed and outline elements and had been submitted in duplicate to Three Rivers District Council and Watford Borough Council.

Three Rivers District Council had considered its application on 10 December 2015 and resolved to grant planning permission.  Since some of the proposed development was within the green belt, the application had been referred to the Secretary of State.  It had been confirmed since that the Secretary of State did not wish to call-in the application and Three Rivers District Council was therefore free to grant planning permission.  This would be undertaken shortly, subject to the completion of a new section 106 agreement.

Only two areas of the site fell within Watford Borough Council and therefore needed to be considered by Watford Borough Council.

A number of amendments to the conditions had been set out in the update sheet, which had been circulated to the Committee.

The Chair invited Dan Dark, Senior Vice President and Managing Director of Warner Bros Studios Leavesden, to speak to the Committee in support of the proposed development. 

Mr Dark outlined his long involvement in both the film studios at Leavesden and in the local and wider town community.  Since 2010 and the entrance of Warner Bros, some £150 million had been invested in the studios, which now supported around 1,300 jobs in the Watford Borough Council and Three Rivers District Council areas.  It was a significant contributor to the local economy.

The Warner Bros Studios had endeavoured to be a good neighbour to the local residents, but it was acknowledged that the success of the film studios impacted on them.  Traffic was a real issue and Warner Bros Studios had worked, and would continue to work, with the Council and local residents to ameliorate its effects.

The Chair invited Woodside Ward Councillor Karen Collett to speak to the Committee.

Councillor Collett acknowledged the positive benefits of Warner Bros Studios to the local economy and its residents.  However concerns remained about traffic impacts, particularly at peak times.  In addition, deliveries to the studios, often using oversized lorries, were sometimes misdirected down local roads.

It was suggested that a traffic impact survey should be undertaken amidst concerns about the proposed new junction.  This should take into account concerns about air quality, carbon footprints and the loss of parking. 

Residents were also interested to see the findings of a green travel plan, which had been part of the original application.  It was suggested that this exercise might be repeated.

The Chair invited Woodside Ward Councillor Tony Rogers to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 53.

Erection of six storey building to provide 2,746 sqm of office (Class B1a) floorspace and 107sqm of floorspace for Class B1a/A2/A5 floorspace with associated car parking, cycle and bin storage and landscaping.

The Committee received the report of the Development Management Section Head, including the relevant planning history of the site and details of responses to the application.

The Development Management Team Leader introduced the item, explaining that the application replaced a five storey building previously approved and would result in an increase in the quantity and quality of office floorspace on the site compared to the previous planning permission.  The six storey building was a mixed use scheme and would contribute towards providing new employment within the Borough, in accordance with the Core Strategy.

The reason for the application was to increase the amount of office floorspace in order to help secure investment funding for a speculative development.

Two small amendments had been made to the conditions and these had been circulated to the Committee in the update sheet.

The Chair invited Douglas Bond, Principal of Woolf Bond Planning, to speak to the Committee in support of the application.

Mr Bond reported that the alternative scheme, which had been worked up following various meetings with officers, offered a significant improvement in the quantity and quality of space provided in the new building.  Consistent with the Council’s Core Strategy, it was hoped that its character and appearance would provide a catalyst for new and improved office space in the Clarendon Road area.

The building’s strong design made a positive feature of the Gartlet Road/Clarendon Road junction, however would not impact on local residential properties.

The building complied with all technical requirements.

The Chair thanked Mr Bond for his comments and opened the debate to the Committee.

The Committee welcomed the new application, which was deemed a much improved design solution entirely consistent with the Council’s policies and aspirations for this important prime office area.

There were no concerns about the impact on local residents, including those located in the nearby Estcourt conservation area. 

Committee members expressed the hope that speedy progress would be made in the construction phase.

The Chair then moved the officer’s recommendation, with amendments to conditions 3 and 5 as set out in the update sheet.

RESOLVED –

That planning permission be granted subject to the following conditions:

Conditions

1.         The development to which this permission relates shall be begun within a period of three years commencing on the date of this permission.

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

9283 PL 500-010A, 500-011, 500-100, 500-101, 500-102, 500-103, 500-104, 500-105, 500-106, 500-200, 500-201.

3.         Construction of the development hereby permitted shall not take place before 8am or after 6pm Mondays to Fridays, and not at all on Saturdays, Sundays and Public Holidays.

4.         No development shall commence until the scheme has been registered with the Considerate Constructors Scheme and a certificate of registration has been submitted to the Local Planning Authority. The construction shall be carried out in accordance with the requirements of this scheme.

5.         The development shall be constructed to BREEAM Very Good in accordance with  ...  view the full minutes text for item 54.

Application to modify Section 106 planning obligations pursuant to planning permission 12/01263/EXT.

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

The Development Management Team Leader introduced the item, explaining that planning permission granted in 2013 had been accompanied by a Section 106 Unilateral Undertaking.  One of the obligations was the provision of six one-bed flats on the site for affordable housing.

The applicant had requested that the clauses relating to the provision of the affordable housing units be deleted.  This was because no registered provider was willing to purchase the units due to the fact that they did not meet the minimum floor areas required by the Homes and Communities Agency.

In lieu, the applicant had agreed to make a financial payment to the Council towards the provision of affordable housing or other identifiable housing needs within the Borough.

The Development Management Team Leader explained that the circumstances surrounding this application were unique.  They arose from changes to affordable housing thresholds, such that the units were no longer suitable.  Watford Borough Council did not have a policy on commuted payments and it was not intended that the proposed arrangement should set a precedent for the future.

The update sheet demonstrated that an alternative solution to use the units for temporary accommodation had been discussed, but had been found impractical.  The option of a commuted payment was therefore the preferred way forward.

Following further discussions with the applicant’s agent, the applicant had agreed to increase the financial payment to £220,000 – an amount sufficient to enable the Council to purchase a unit on the open market to be used for affordable accommodation.

The Chair invited Matthew Spilsburg, the agent, to speak to the Committee in support of the application.

Mr Spilsburg outlined the considerable attempts which had been made by the applicant to fulfil the conditions of planning permission 12/01263/EXT.  The applicant had worked constructively with Council officers to find an alternative solution, including a late proposal to use the units for temporary accommodation.

Drawing the Committee’s attention to a letter from Mr Brandon Lewis, Minister of State for Housing and Planning at the Department for Communities and Local Government which had urged local authorities to take a flexible approach to affordable housing renegotiation, Mr Spilsburg asked the Committee to take a pragmatic approach to the proposed commuted payment.  This had been increased, with the agreement of the applicant, from £177,200 to £220,000.

Thanking the speaker for his comments, the Chair opened the debate to the Committee.

Accepting that the minimum standards for the size of units had changed, Councillor Bell nevertheless expressed frustration that it had not been possible to secure much needed affordable housing for the Borough.  He concurred with the view that the commuted payment should not set a precedent for future developments.

Agreeing with these comments, Councillor Bashir sought assurance that the Council’s requirements would in future match accepted standards for affordable housing accommodation.

Responding to Councillor Bashir’s comments, the Development Management Team Leader confirmed that Watford Borough Council’s policies complied with the Homes and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 55.

Application to install 11 advertising panels with market graphics above the containers in the existing market.

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

The Head of Regeneration and Development introduced the item explaining that the application proposed the installation of 11 woven polyester mesh panels on the road-facing side of the market.  All of the panels would display advertisements for the market.  The proposal was intended to ameliorate on-going concerns about exposure to the weather on the road side and poor advertising for the market. 

The application presented two key considerations for the Committee: potential impact on public safety and the impact on amenity.  It should be noted that Hertfordshire County Council had not raised any objections.

Opening the debate to Committee members, the Chair began by expressing his concerns, as Ward Councillor for Central, about the number of panels and the potential for them to deteriorate over time.

In response, the Head of Regeneration and Development commented that any reduction in the number of panels would impact on the ability to shield the market from the elements, which had been one of the key objectives.  The proposed panel materials had been used successfully elsewhere and were expected to have a 10 year life-span.

Taking up the second of these points, Councillor Sharpe suggested that advertisement consent be granted for a shorter period, for example 18 months.  He did not support a reduction in the number of panels because this would make the boards appear less visually coherent.

Councillor Turmaine questioned whether it was the intention to use the advertisement panels for other advertising purposes.  The Head of Regeneration and Development confirmed that this was not the intention as it would negatively impact on visual amenity.  In order to prevent such use in the future, it would be possible to add a further condition to the advertisement consent.

Considering the proposed materials for the panels, Councillor Bashir questioned whether it would be possible to use clear, solid panels instead.  This would allow more natural light to enter the market and would remove concerns about advertising usage. 

The Head of Regeneration and Development commented that the existing structure was not designed to be enclosed in the way proposed by Councillor Bashir.  She reiterated the need to improve advertising for the market, which the proposal before the Committee was attempting to rectify.

Moving the officer’s recommendation, the Chair proposed that consent be granted for a period of 18 months.  Furthermore, any advertisement usage should be restricted to promoting the Watford Market only.

RESOLVED –

That advertisement consent be granted subject to the following conditions:

1. This consent is granted for a period of 18 months from the date of this consent notice,

2. No advertisement is to be displayed without the permission of the owner of the site on which they are displayed;

3. No advertisement is to be displayed which would obscure, or hinder the interpretation of, official road, rail, waterway or aircraft signs, or otherwise make hazardous the use of these types of transport;

4. Any advertisement must be maintained in a condition that does  ...  view the full minutes text for item 56.