Agenda and minutes

Agenda and minutes

Venue: Town Hall

Contact: Ishbel Morren  Email: legalanddemocratic@watford.gov.uk

Items
No. Item

64.

Apologies for absence/committee membership

Minutes:

There was a change of membership for this committee.  Councillor Collett replaced Councillor Kent.

65.

Disclosure of interests

Minutes:

Councillor Laird reported that his employer had been one of the consultants working on application 17/01591/FULM (Sydney Road) and he would not therefore participate in discussions on this item.  Councillor Laird was absent from the Council Chamber during deliberations.

66.

Minutes

The minutes of the meeting held on 31 January 2018 to be submitted and signed.

Minutes:

The minutes of the meeting held on 31 January 2018 were submitted and signed.

67.

17/01591/FULM 29 - 43 Sydney Road And The Plot Between 7 And 9 Sydney Road pdf icon PDF 179 KB

Erection of two apartment buildings, of up to 7 and 10 storeys, to provide 135 apartments (38 affordable). (Amended plans)

Additional documents:

Minutes:

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 Principal Planning Officer (AR) introduced the report explaining that the application proposed the demolition of the existing buildings on site and erection of two residential buildings of up to 7 and 10 storeys, to provide 135 apartments (of which 38 would be affordable) and the erection of a two bedroom dwelling.

 

The Chair invited Fauzia Farooq, a local resident, to speak against the application.  Ms Farooq explained that she was speaking on behalf of local residents who considered the proposed scheme to be an overdevelopment of the site in an already overcrowded area of Watford.  It would be overbearing and out of scale and context with the local area, which was predominantly characterised by two and three storey Victorian houses.  The application should not be referenced by the more distant Ascot Road development. 

 

Whilst residents accepted, and welcomed, the redevelopment of the site to provide new housing, they were concerned that the detrimental impact on local residents was being ignored.  This included overlooking and privacy concerns and unacceptable reductions in sun and day light levels to neighbouring properties in contravention of BRE guidelines and the council’s Residential Design Guide. 

 

In addition, residents raised concerns about the lack of green space and play areas for children, and about parking provision.  

 

The Chair invited Douglas Bond from Woolf Bond Planning, to speak to the committee.  Speaking on behalf of the applicant, Mr Bond explained that the current scheme had been agreed following extensive discussions with the key stakeholders, including council officers and local residents.  The result was a compliant scheme which would bring sustainable regeneration to enhance the area, much needed family sized affordable housing units and environmental improvements to local residents.

 

Commenting on the design of the scheme, Mr Bond advised that the taller buildings of concern to residents would be set back from the road.  The buildings fronting the street would be three storeys in height, in keeping with surrounding properties.

 

Mr Bond noted that given the accessible and sustainable location of the site, a s106 agreement had been agreed which would restrict future occupiers’ entitlement to park in the surrounding controlled parking zone (CPZ).  This would prevent further parking pressures on local roads.  In addition, the applicant had agreed to investigate the feasibility of including a car club in the development.

 

The Chair thanked the speakers and invited comments from the committee.

 

Committee members welcomed the new affordable housing provision included in the scheme.  Although this did not meet the council’s 35% requirements based on units, it was noted that the proposed tenure mix, which included larger family sized units, was acceptable in addressing the borough’s urgent housing need.

 

There was a discussion about the design of the development and its effect on the surrounding area, particularly its height and visual impact, as well as issues about overlooking and reduced sun  ...  view the full minutes text for item 67.

68.

18/00062/FULH 32 Park Road pdf icon PDF 99 KB

Demolition of existing freestanding garage and erection of a two storey side and two storey rear extension (amended description).

Additional documents:

Minutes:

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 report.  He explained that the application proposed the demolition of an existing freestanding garage and the erection of a two storey side and two storey rear extension.

 

Attention was drawn to the update sheet which included an amended site location plan.

 

The Chair invited Andrew Spanner, a local resident, to speak to the committee in opposition to the application.  Speaking on behalf of local residents, Mr Spanner expressed concerns about the width of the front elevation of the proposed extension and the resultant footprint of the new building.  Residents had reservations about the impact of the scheme on the character of the street, both in terms of the visibility of the building from Park Road and the loss of spacing between the buildings. 

 

Mr Spanner noted that the development was within the Nascot Conservation Area and questioned whether some design aspects of the scheme were appropriate in this context. Residents requested that sympathetic consideration be given to the use of materials and to conditions attached to some windows overlooking neighbouring properties.

 

The Chair invited Robert Wilson from Impact Planning Services to speak for the application.  Mr Wilson outlined the careful changes made to the previous development, which had been refused by officers and then dismissed on appeal in 2016.  The result was a compliant application which met with council officers’ recommendations, including those of the Urban Design and Conservation Officer, and would not cause harm to the adjacent, locally listed building or to the character and appearance of the Nascot Conservation Area.

 

The Chair thanked the speakers and invited comments from the committee.

 

Committee members broadly welcomed the planning application, which they did not consider provided grounds for refusal.  Residents’ concerns about the use of suitable materials were acknowledged and it was noted that these remained subject to agreement with the planning officers.

 

The Chair moved the officer’s recommendation.

 

RESOLVED –

 

That planning permission be granted subject to the following conditions:

 

Conditions

 

1.         The development to which this permission relates shall be begun within       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 drawing:-

           

A 100 000 P1, 001 P1, 002 P1, 003 P0

A 110 001 P1, 002 P1, 003 P1, 004 P0

A 000 001 P3, 005 P1

           

 3.        Notwithstanding the details given on the application form, no development shall commence until full details of all external materials to be used for the approved extensions have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. These should match as closely as possible to the materials of the existing house at the application site. The approved extensions shall only be constructed in the approved materials.

 

4.         No development shall commence until details of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 68.

69.

17/01281/FULM Grafton Optical, Crown House, The Crescent pdf icon PDF 141 KB

Demolition of existing warehouse/office/showroom building and erection of two buildings comprising 21 residential units.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

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 report, explaining that the application was for the demolition of the existing warehouse/office/showroom building and erection of two buildings comprising 21 residential units.

 

The Chair invited Jane Wakelin from Wakelin Associates, to speak for the application.  Ms Wakelin outlined the constrained nature of the former industrial site and the detailed work that had been undertaken to devise a compliant residential scheme which would both complement neighbouring properties and the surrounding High Street/King Street Conservation Area. 

 

Although the restricted site was in a highly sustainable and central location with access to local shops and public transport options, two parking spaces would be provided in the development.  The scheme also included a commuted sum in lieu of affordable housing provision. 

 

Thanking the speaker, the Chair invited comments from the committee.

 

Members of the committee welcomed the development of the former industrial site to provide housing in a central location.  However, in addition to reservations about the extent of the commuted sum in lieu of affordable housing, there was much concern about the unsatisfactory design of the scheme.  This was not considered to conserve or enhance the High Street/King Street Conservation Area and the Chair invited Councillor Sharpe to propose a motion to refuse the application.

 

Councillor Sharpe proposed that the application be refused by nature of its design and external appearance, in particular the poor quality side elevation and uninspiring elevation to The Crescent and the zinc roof materials, which fail to preserve or enhance the character and appearance of the High Street King Street Conservation Area, contrary to Policies UD1 and UD2 of the Watford Local Plan Core Strategy 2006-31.

 

RESOLVED –

 

That planning permission be refused for the following reason:

 

By nature of its design and external appearance, in particular the poor quality side elevation and uninspiring elevation to The Crescent and the zinc roof materials, the proposal fails to preserve or enhance the character and appearance of the High Street King Street Conservation Area, contrary to Policies UD1 and UD2 of the Watford Local Plan Core Strategy 2006-31.

 

70.

17/00862/FULM 85 Chalk Hill pdf icon PDF 150 KB

Demolition of existing disused bank building and replacement with new residential development which includes 11 new dwellings with associated gardens and car parking. (Amended plans)

Additional documents:

Minutes:

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.

 

Before inviting officers to speaker, the Chair explained to the committee the linked nature of the above application and the following item (17/01619/FUL Land Adjacent To 17 - 19 St Johns Road).  As a consequence, the committee should consider the two applications concurrently.  Separate votes would be taken at the end of the committee’s deliberations.

 

The Principal Planning Officer (CO) introduced the report.  He explained that the application was for the demolition of the existing disused bank building and replacement with a new residential development which included 11 dwellings.

 

The Chair invited Miles Young from MRPP to speak for the application.  Mr Young explained the improvements which had been made to the previously refused scheme on this site.  These included significant changes to the building design and materials, and to parking arrangements in this congested part of Oxhey.

 

Mr Young went on to outline the arrangements which had been agreed with planning officers to provide affordable housing at a different location in St John’s Road.  This was the subject of the next application on the committee’s agenda (17/01619/FUL Land Adjacent To 17 - 19 St Johns Road).

 

Thanking the speaker, the Chair invited comments from the committee.

 

Members of the committee welcomed the innovative solution being offered by the developer to provide market sale and affordable housing, particularly of the tenure most needed in the borough, across two sites in the town. 

 

However, there were some questions about the contemporary design approach of the Oxhey development, which some members of the committee considered to be cramped, cluttered and out of character with the surrounding area. 

 

The Chair moved the officer’s 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, conditional planning permission be granted subject to the conditions listed below:

 

Section 106 Heads of Terms

 

i)                    To require the 3no. 3-bed houses proposed in the planning application at land adjacent to 17 – 19 St Johns Road (ref: 17/01619/FUL) to be provided as affordable rented units.

 

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:-

           

            MRPP2; 5407/A100 Rev P;5407/A101 Rev L; 5407/A108 Rev F; TS16-148R\1; TS16-148R\2; TS16-148R\3; TS16-148R\4; TS16-148R\5.

 

3.         No construction works above damp proof course level shall commence until details of the materials to be used for all the external finishes of the buildings, including walls, roofs, doors, windows, fascias and balustrades, have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out only in accordance with the approved materials.

 

4.         No construction works above damp proof course level  ...  view the full minutes text for item 70.

71.

17/01619/FUL Land Adjacent To 17 - 19 St Johns Road pdf icon PDF 117 KB

Erection of 3 three bedroom townhouses, 1 one bedroom apartment and 1 two bedroom apartment.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

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 the report.  He explained that the proposed application was for the erection of three townhouses, and two apartments.

 

Attention was drawn to the update sheet which included an amendment to the terms of the legal agreement and to a number of the conditions.

 

The Chair invited Miles Young from MRPP to speak for the application.  Mr Young advised the committee that over time this had proved a difficult site on which to deliver a viable development.  Linked to application 17/00862/FULM (85 Chalk Hill) it would, in effect, become a donor site to deliver larger affordable housing units at a central location in the town.  The development included two houses for market sale.  All the properties would be excluded from the CPZ which would prevent residents parking permits being issued.

 

The Chair invited comments from the committee.

 

In addition to comments made by the committee on the previous linked application, members of the committee welcomed the St John’s Road development, both for its delivery of larger affordable housing units and for its pleasing design.

 

The Chair moved the officer’s 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, conditional planning permission be granted subject to the conditions listed below:

 

Section 106 Heads of Terms

 

(a)   To secure the 3 no. 3-bed houses proposed in the planning application to be Affordable Housing units;

 

(b)   To secure a financial payment to the Council of £2,000 towards the variation of the Borough of Watford (Watford Central Area and West Watford Area) (Controlled Parking Zones) (Consolidation) Order 2010 to exclude the site from the controlled parking zone, thereby preventing residents’ parking permits being issued to this site;

                                                  

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          No construction works above damp proof course level shall commence until full details and samples of the materials to be used for the external surfaces of the building, including doors, and windows have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Thereafter, the development shall only be implemented in accordance with the approved details.

                                       

3          The windows and the doors to be inserted in the external walls of the building shall be recessed a minimum of 6cm from the external walls, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

           

4          No construction works above damp proof course level shall commence until full details of the provision for bicycle storage facilities, refuse and re-cycling storage have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details prior to the first  ...  view the full minutes text for item 71.

72.

17/01510/FULM 2 The Boulevard Blackmoor Lane pdf icon PDF 182 KB

Demolition of existing office and storage building and erection of new office and storage building with associated car parking and landscaping.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

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 Principal Planning Officer (CO) introduced the report explaining that the application proposed the demolition of the existing office and storage building and erection of a new office and storage building with associated car parking and landscaping.

 

In the absence of any speakers or comments from the committee, the Chair moved the officer’s 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, conditional planning permission be granted subject to the conditions listed below:

 

Section 106 Heads of Terms

 

i)                    To require the implementation of the submitted Travel Plan.

ii)                  To require the submission and implementation of a Car Parking Management Plan.

iii)                To secure a financial payment to Hertfordshire County Council of £6,000 for the long term monitoring of the proposed Travel Plan and Car Parking Management Plan for the site.

 

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.         Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 (as amended), and any subsequent legislation that amends or supersedes this Order, the floorspace hereby approved shall only be used as an office and warehouse within Classes B1 and B8 of the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987 (as amended) as shown on the approved plans.

 

3.         All the external surfaces of the development shall be finished in the materials shown on the approved plans. Details of any alternative materials shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of the development and the development shall only be carried out in accordance with any alternative details approved by this Condition.

 

4.         The approved landscaping scheme shown in document references PJC-0692-002 Rev B; PJC-0692-004 Rev A; PJC-0692-005 Rev A; PJC-0692-006; and  PJC-0692-007 Rev A  (or any alternative documents and plans submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority) shall be carried out not later than the first available planting and seeding season after completion of the development. Any trees or plants whether new or existing which within a period of five years die, are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced in the next planting season with others of similar size and species, or in accordance with details approved by the Local Planning Authority.

 

5.         The approved tree protection measures shown in the Arboricultural Method Statement dated 11th October 2017 carried out by PJC Consultancy shall be implemented for the duration of the construction work, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

 

6.         The development permitted by this planning permission shall be carried out in accordance with the approved surface water  ...  view the full minutes text for item 72.

73.

17/00459/FULM 75-81 The Parade, High Street pdf icon PDF 214 KB

Demolition of existing buildings and redevelopment of site to provide new building comprising 4 storeys above ground level and 2 floors below ground level to create a 55 bedroom hotel with associated facilities.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

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 Head of Development Management introduced the report explaining that the application was for the demolition of the existing buildings and redevelopment of the site to provide a new building comprising four storeys above ground level and two floors below ground level to create a 55 bedroom hotel with associated facilities.

 

There were no speakers.  The Chair asked the committee for comments.

 

Members of the committee concurred with the officer’s conclusions and recommendation.  It was agreed that the proposed plans were neither credible nor appropriate in this location and should be refused.

 

The Chair moved the officer’s recommendation.

 

RESOLVED –

 

That planning permission be refused for the reasons listed below:

 

1.         The proposed building, by virtue of its design, scale and form, would fail to respond positively to the site’s context and would cause harm to the visual amenity of the area. The building would incorporate a staggered building line on the upper floors of its front elevation. This design would result in a building form whereby the ground floor level (which incidentally would follow a continuous building line) would appear somewhat separated from, and at odds with, the upper floors. This arrangement would result in the building having a disjointed appearance. Additionally, the rear elevation would offer a rather hostile appearance at ground floor level that would not provide an attractive interface with the public realm and which may present opportunities for anti-social behaviour. Overall, it is considered that the scheme would fail to make a positive contribution to the visual amenity of the area, the street scene or the character and appearance of the Civic Core Conservation Area and would fail to minimise the opportunities for crime and anti-social behaviour through design that creates safe and attractive places. This would be contrary to Policies SS1, UD1 and UD2 of the Watford Local Plan Core Strategy 2006-31 and paragraphs 17 and 58 and of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF).

 

2.         The proposed roof of the building would incorporate a gable form which appears to take its cue from Monmouth House and the buildings at 97-99 The Parade and 101-117 The Parade. The proposed front and rear elevations would also incorporate brick horizontal and vertical elements which would appear to be derived from the half timbering on the buildings at 97-99 The Parade and 101-117 The Parade. Given the strong form and scale of the proposed gables, it is felt that these would appear dominant in the context of the street scene and would compete with those found on the nearby listed and locally listed buildings which are proportionately smaller, lower in height and less dominant overall. Similarly, it is felt that the elevational approach would invite comparison and highlight the poor quality of the proposed building against the higher quality buildings found in the area. Consequently, it is considered that the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 73.

 

rating button