There was a change of membership for this meeting: Councillor Laird replaced Councillor Maestas.  Councillor Joynes had sent apologies.

Councillor Laird advised that he had had professional dealings with the applicant for agenda item 6 (15/01787/FULM 53 Clarendon Road) previously.  However he had not had any contact with the applicant in regard to the current development proposal.

Councillor Sharpe commented that whilst there had been much focus within his ward regarding agenda item 4 (Hertsmere Borough Council ref.16/2272/FUL), he had not been involved in any detailed discussions on the application.

The minutes of the Development Management Committee held on 15 February 2017 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 15 February 2017 were submitted and signed.

Consultation from Hertsmere Borough Council on development adjoining the Borough:

Demolition of 37 Bucks Avenue and equestrian facility, removal of hardstanding, ménages, buildings and structures and the redevelopment of the site to include 24 dwellings (8 affordable).

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

The Development Management Team Leader (PB) introduced the item, explaining that the application took the form of a consultation from Hertsmere Borough Council on development adjoining the borough.  This was for the demolition of 37 Bucks Avenue and equestrian facility and the redevelopment of the site to include 24 dwellings (including 8 affordable).  All dwellings would be served by modifying the existing access from Bucks Avenue/Sherwoods Road (amended scheme).

It was noted that the current consultation followed earlier discussions by the Development Management Committee in November 2015, relating to a scheme for the development of the site for 34 dwellings.

Attention was drawn to the update sheet, which included a correction to the report.  In addition, the committee was advised that Hertsmere Borough Council would be considering the application at their committee on 16 March 2017. The officer recommendation was for approval.

The Chair invited Kim Baxter to speak against the application.  Ms Baxter explained that she was speaking on behalf of the Oxhey Village Environment Group (OVEG), which had a number of objections to the application.   Ms Baxter circulated some explanatory diagrams to assist her presentation.

Ms Baxter explained that whilst residents welcomed changes in the current application, not least the reduction in the total number of dwellings, the design of the accommodation and the improved parking arrangements, concerns remained.  Citing National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) guidance, Ms Baxter advised that inappropriate development was harmful to the Green Belt and should not be approved except in very special circumstances.  The current application did not meet these circumstances. 

Despite a reduction in the number of dwellings, the current proposal would increase the total volume of Green Belt taken up and reduce access.  OVEG supported a more modest development, which would remove a further eight dwellings to reduce encroachment on the Green Belt.

The Chair invited Iain Taylor from Clover Court Fusion to speak for the application.  Mr Taylor explained that he was the agent for the application.  Outlining the planning history of the site, Mr Taylor reported that a large number of changes had been made to the design and layout in the current proposal to meet with criticism of the previous application for 34 dwellings.  This would afford greater openness on the site and would secure access to 2.5 hectares of Green Belt on a permanent basis.

The developer was proposing to make improvements to the biodiversity of the site and to assist public recreation opportunities, following acceptance of the loss of the riding school to the local area.

The Chair invited Oxhey Ward Councillor Peter Taylor to speak to the committee.  Councillor Taylor highlighted residents’ concerns about the developer’s public campaign to favour the new scheme.  This might have skewed apparent support for the application in letters to the council.

Considering the NPPF guidance, Councillor Taylor suggested that the proposal  ...  view the full minutes text for item 66.

Demolition of the existing office building and erection of a mixed-use building of 4, 9 and 14 storeys incorporating office space and 41 residential flats.

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

The Development Management Team Leader (PB) introduced this item.  He explained that the application was to demolish the existing office building and erect a mixed-use building of 4, 9 and 14 storeys incorporating 1,800m2 of office floorspace and 41 residential flats.

Attention was drawn to the update sheet which included some clarifications on the officer’s report, particularly in regard to the viability of the scheme.

The Chair invited Adam Murray from Coda Planning to speak for the application.  Mr Murray advised the committee that this was an exciting, landmark development which had evolved over a number of years.  On-going discussions had been held with planning officers to devise the most workable scheme for the site, which would see a near doubling of the amount of office accommodation available and some 41 residential flats.  The development was in a sustainable location and there would be no on-site parking provision.

A payment of £368,000 had been agreed with the council in lieu of affordable housing provision on site.

Before opening out discussions to the committee, the Chair commented that he had concerns about the lack of affordable housing provision in the proposals.  This contravened the council’s own policies, which required 35% affordable housing provision on all new residential sites over a certain size.  The Chair commented that the committee had a duty to balance the developer’s desire to make a profit against the Council’s need to meet its requirement for affordable housing.  He considered that more information was required about the developer’s viability assessment for this scheme to enable the Committee to make that judgement.

Whilst welcoming the overall design of the tall building and the proposed mixed use development, the committee agreed that viability was proving a key issue in decision making for planning applications.  As such, it was important that all relevant information should be made available to the committee members in order to make informed decisions.  This included full access to any viability reports.

As a consequence, it was agreed that a decision on this application be deferred to allow time for a full scrutiny and assessment of the developer’s viability report. 

The Head of Development Management reported that he would arrange a meeting with the council’s advisers, GL Hearn, for councillors to help determine how the council should instruct consultants in future applications on the question of viability.

RESOLVED –

That a decision on the application be deferred, pending full consideration by the committee of the developer’s viability report and rationale in regard to its offer of £368,000 for off-site affordable housing provision.

The redevelopment of the site to provide a mixed use development with the erection of a building up to 11 storeys, comprising office accommodation, coffee bar and 59 dwelling units (21 affordable).

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

The Development Management Team Leader (HN) introduced this item, explaining that the application was for the redevelopment of the site to provide a mixed use development with the erection of a building of up to 11 storeys.  This would comprise 6,247m² of office accommodation, 140m² of coffee bar use and 59 dwellings (21 affordable).

Attention was drawn to the update sheet, which included some additional information received since the committee papers were published. 

A model of the development was available for viewing in the Council Chamber.

The Chair invited Nick Shute from Nick Shute Associates to speak against the application.  Speaking on behalf of four of the current business occupiers at 53 Clarendon Road, employing some 250 employees, who would be displaced (possibly outside the borough) if this redevelopment were permitted, Mr Shute stated that Clarendon Road should be protected as an employment area.  This was in line with the council’s own policies which had sought to prevent office to residential conversions.

Businesses were concerned that placing residential development in the heart of the town’s main office area would increase congestion and downgrade the quality of Clarendon Road for business.  It would limit the future redevelopment potential of adjoining businesses for office purposes and its height would dwarf surrounding buildings on Monmouth Road.

Mr Shute also questioned whether the council’s procedural rules had been followed correctly for this application.

Responding to this last point, the Head of Development Management refuted that there had been any procedural irregularities in this application.  All required procedures had been followed strictly by officers, including undertaking the appropriate consultations and placing press advertisements and site notices relating to the amended plans.

The Chair invited comments from the committee.

Members of the committee considered the scheme to be both well designed and an efficient use of land, which would enhance the quality of office space on Clarendon Road.  Although the development would be higher than surrounding buildings, the committee accepted that the council’s Supplementary Planning Document, Skyline  (Watford’s Approach to Taller Buildings), had identified Clarendon Road as a suitable location for taller buildings.

The committee also welcomed the additional housing in the mixed development, which was a common feature in central London.  The sustainable accommodation was considered to provide a good level of amenity space and would include 35% affordable housing units for which there would be a separate entrance to allow easier management of the flats.

Committee members noted that the developer had sought to ensure that the amenities of the adjoining occupiers in terms of loss of light and privacy had been reasonably protected.

The Chair moved the officer recommendation.

RESOLVED –

That, pursuant to a planning obligation under s.106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 having been completed to secure the following Heads of Terms, planning permission be granted subject to the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 68.