There was a change of membership for this committee: Councillor Bashir replaced Councillor Smith.

Councillor Dhindsa advised that he had an interest in application 18/00579/FULM (Land at 87 Cassio Road) and would not participate in, and would leave the room for, discussions on this item.

Councillor Bell advised that he had held some discussions with residents in roads close to Vicarage Road, but had not expressed any opinions on application 18/00614/FULM (56D, 56E, 58 and 58A, Vicarage Road).

The Head of Development Management drew the committee’s attention to the update sheet which included a summary of important revisions to the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) published on 24 July 2018.  In particular he drew their attention to the need to apply the weighted test set out in paragraph 11d) of the NPPF having regard to matters of housing supply.

The minutes of the meeting held on 4 July 2018 to be submitted and signed.

The minutes of the meeting held on 4 July 2018 were submitted and signed subject to an alteration requested by Councillor Williams:

Item 12 – 18/00580/FUL 36A Purbrook Avenue.  Following some comments from the committee, the Chair moved the officer’s recommendation.

Proposed redevelopment of the site to provide a mixed use scheme comprising of 33 residential units (Class C3), flexible commercial floorspace (Class A1/A2/B1/D2) associated cycle parking, landscaping and associated works

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 proposed the redevelopment of the site to provide a mixed use scheme comprising 33 residential units (Class C3), flexible commercial floor space (Class A1/A2/B1/D2) associated cycle parking, landscaping and associated works.

Attention was drawn to the update sheet, which included information on an additional representation to the application.

The Chair invited Sam Hine, the agent, to speak for the application.  Mr Hine advised the committee that the principle of redeveloping this brownfield site aligned with Watford Borough Council and national government planning policies.  The existing buildings detracted from the area and the proposed scheme, developed in close cooperation with officers and the local community, provided a carefully designed mixed use scheme, which was fully policy compliant.  It would provide much needed residential units in a central location. 

The proposals incorporated some additional mitigation measures to enhance privacy levels and the design’s transition in height would enable adjacent sites to come forward in the future.

The application included a commuted sum in lieu of affordable housing of £350,000.

Mr Hine also read out a statement from a local resident, in attendance with him at the meeting, who had been impressed by the applicant’s engagement with residents and was supportive of the scheme.

The Chair invited Vicarage Ward Councillor Jagtar Singh Dhindsa to speak to the committee.  Councillor Dhindsa welcomed the development of the site, but expressed concern at the submitted scheme.  This was considered too high at four/five storeys in an area of predominantly one and two storey buildings. 

In addition, Councillor Dhindsa outlined the unacceptable strain that future occupants of the development would place on already overstretched local services, particularly schools, and on parking in congested surrounding streets.  He also emphasised the need for affordable, particularly social rent, housing in Vicarage Ward.

Before seeking comments from the committee, the Chair expressed some reservations about the scheme.  Whilst the principle of development was acceptable, this was being achieved at the expense of a locally listed building and on a scale which was disproportionate with the surrounding area, including the Square Conservation Area.  Although not advocating the use of Victorian pastiche, the Chair considered the design lacked texture and detail.  He particularly regretted the use of external timber cladding.

Members of the committee welcomed the regeneration of the site and the benefits that this would bring to the street scene.  They noted the consultation and engagement which the developer had undertaken with the local community, however were disappointed that this had not resulted in the provision of affordable housing in the scheme which was in great demand in the area.

Echoing the views of the Chair, committee members considered that the height of the proposed development was disproportionate in an area more typically characterised by two or three storey buildings.

Concerns were  ...  view the full minutes text for item 16.

Demolition of temporary building and redevelopment to provide 25 residential apartments

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 a temporary building and its redevelopment to provide 25 residential apartments.

Attention was drawn to the update sheet, which included some additional representations, information and proposed alterations to the reasons for refusal.

The Chair invited Councillor Steve Bolton, reading a statement on behalf of Dr Tim Robson, a local GP and associated with homelessness services in Watford, New Hope and the site at Cassio Road for over 30 years, to speak to the committee. 

Dr Robson’s statement outlined the history of the Meadowell surgery, which was founded on its present Cassio Road site in 2003.  This had proved an ideal location (easily accessible, away from the immediate town centre and close to other relevant services) to meet the needs of vulnerable members of the community at risk of addiction and early death.  The West Herts Sports Club had been an excellent landlord.

Whilst accepting that it was sensible for the sports club to realise this asset and invest in its facilities to ensure its future sustainability, Dr Robson explained that the unique suitability of this site for essential homelessness services had been confirmed following a fruitless search for a new location.  An alternative development plan for the site was being prepared by the surgery and local health service.  Dialogue with the club would be welcomed.

The Chair invited Christopher Waumsley, Head of Planning and Environment at Freeths solicitors, to speak in support of the application.  Mr Waumsley highlighted the council’s opposition to the development which was based on a designation of the land as open space.  He questioned whether this was the case since the Watford Local Plan Core Strategy 2006-31 did not identify the land as part of the open space network for the town.  The land had anyway not been used as such in over 30 years and temporary planning permission remained in place for the site. 

Mr Waumsley noted that no objections had been received from Sport England.  He argued that the size, shape and location of the land made it unsuited to sporting activity.  The club was seeking to maintain and improve its facilities.  Its rules did not allow any funds, including payments for land or property, to be distributed to members or to be used for any purposes other than promoting the club’s sporting objectives.  A list of planned works and facilities had been included in the application and the club was prepared to enter into a legally binding agreement to ensure their realisation.

Responding to a query from the Chair, the Head of Development Management confirmed that the site was clearly shown as open space on the Proposals Map of the Watford District Plan 2000, which had been saved, alongside relevant policies, by the Secretary of State in 2007  ...  view the full minutes text for item 17.

Redevelopment of the site to provide 408 residential dwellings with associated landscaping, amenity space, access and parking

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 redevelopment of the site to provide 408 residential dwellings with associated landscaping, amenity space, access and parking.

Attention was drawn to the update sheet which included some amendments to the conditions and informatives.

The Chair invited Steve Rossouw, the client, to speak in support of the application.  Speaking on behalf of the Watford Health Campus Partnership, Mr Rossouw set out the context of the development in the wider Riverwell regeneration scheme.  The current phase would deliver over 400 new homes, including 118 affordable units (with a mechanism to increase the number should viability permit), and add to the regeneration of the area.   Other benefits of the scheme included contributions to the delivery of a new primary school and to local secondary schools, the construction of Thomas Sawyer Way, local traffic enhancements and environmental and accessibility improvements.

Working with planning officers, the resultant design was considered robust and visually appealing.  Landscaping had been maximised and the building height and density were appropriate for the location as well as the size and scale of the development.

The Chair invited comments from the committee.

Members expressed disappointment about the affordable housing provision, particularly the lack of socially rented properties.  Although provision was 29% by unit or 30% by habitable room, this fell short of the council’s 35% target.

The Deputy Managing Director advised that rates of provision were likely to vary across the Riverwell site reflecting the different construction costs encountered, for example with the cleaning up of contaminated land.  It was anticipated that the next phase, the Farm Terrace allotment site, would achieve affordable housing levels closer to 40%.

In response to additional comments about the scale of the proposed scheme, the Head of Development Management commented that there were substantial differences in topography across the Riverwell site and careful consideration had therefore been given to the siting and design of the various developments.  The scheme under consideration was not considered to be out of scale or proportion.

The Chair moved the officer’s recommendation subject to the changes on the update sheet.

RESOLVED –

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:

RWL-LHA-RX-00-DR-A-0001 5

RWL-LHA-RX-01-DR-A-0002 2

RWL-LHA-RX-00-DR-A-0003 06

RWL-LHA-RX-01-DR-A-0004 04

RWL-LHA-RX-RL-DR-A-0005  04

RWL-LHA-RX-ZZ-DR-A-0006 02

RWL-LHA-RX-ZZ-DR-A-0007 01

RWL-LHA-ZZ-00-DR-A-0001 01

RWL-LHA-ZZ-XX-DR-A-0002 01

RWL-LHA-RD-ZZ-DR-A-0001 01

RWL-LHA-RD-ZZ-DR-A-0002 00

RWL-LHA-RD-ZZ-DR-A-0002a 00

RWL-LHA-RD-ZZ-DR-A-0002b 00

RWL-LHA-RD-ZZ-DR-A-0003 00

RWL-LHA-RD-ZZ-DR-A-0004 00

RWL-LHA-RD-ZZ-DR-A-0005 00

RWL-LHA-RD-ZZ-DR-A-0006 00

RWL-LHA-RE-ZZ-DR-A-0001 00

RWL-LHA-RE-ZZ-DR-A-0002 01

RWL-LHA-RE-ZZ-DR-A-0003 00

RWL-LHA-RE-ZZ-DR-A-0004 01

RWL-LHA-RE-ZZ-DR-A-0005 00

RWL-LHA-RE-ZZ-DR-A-0006 00

RWL-LHA-RE-ZZ-DR-A-0007 01

RWL-LHA-RE-ZZ-DR-A-0008 00

RWL-LHA-RE-ZZ-DR-A-0009 01

RWL-LHA-RF-ZZ-DR-A-0001 00

RWL-LHA-RF-ZZ-DR-A-0002 00

RWL-LHA-RF-ZZ-DR-A-0003 00

RWL-LHA-RF-ZZ-DR-A-0004 01

RWL-LHA-RF-ZZ-DR-A-0005 01

RWL-LHA-RF-ZZ-DR-A-0006 00

RWL-LHA-RF-ZZ-DR-A-0007 01

RWL-LHA-RF-ZZ-DR-A-0008 00

RWL-LHA-RF-ZZ-DR-A-0009 01

RWL-LHA-RX-ZZ-DR-A-010 00

RWL-LHA-RX-ZZ-DR-A-011  ...  view the full minutes text for item 18.

Demolition of existing buildings and redevelopment of site to create 19 residential units with associated works

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, explaining that the application was for the demolition of the existing buildings and subsequent redevelopment of the site to create 19 residential units with associated works.

Attention was drawn to the update sheet which included some changes to the conditions and to the section 106 agreement.

The Chair invited Conor Doyle, the agent, to speak for the application.  Mr Doyle reminded the committee that the application site was last at committee on 29 November 2017.  The current proposal sought to build on the previous permission with the addition of four units. 

The amended proposal would provide payment in lieu of affordable housing in excess of £127,000.  In addition, a late sales review uplift would attribute a proportion of any extra sales revenue to the council.

Mr Doyle advised that the building design had been short-listed for a construction regeneration award.

The Chair moved the officer’s recommendation subject to the changes included in the update sheet and a stipulation, included in the conditions, that the developer should seek an alternative external finish to unprotected timber, which had not weathered well in other developments in the town.

RESOLVED –

Recommendation 1

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 conditions listed below:

Section 106 Heads of Terms

i)          A financial contribution in lieu of the provision of on-site affordable housing to the sum of £127,761, in accordance with Policy HS3 of the Watford Local Plan Core Strategy 2006-2031.  The agreement shall also secure a review mechanism of the viability of the scheme for a contribution up to a maximum total contribution of £761,160 towards the provision of affordable housing in the Borough of Watford, subject to the review demonstrating the improved viability of the development.

ii)         The provision, as necessary, of fire hydrants to serve the development in accordance with Policy INF1of the Watford Local Plan Core Strategy 2006-31 and saved Policy H10 of the Watford District Plan 2000.

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:

0617-000-P5               Location Plan

0617-102-P7               Block Plan

0617-103-P1               Block Plan

0617-105-P7               Landscape Plan

0617-106-P4               Separation Distance Plans

0617-107-P4               Sweep Track Analysis – Van

0617-108-P4               Sweep Track Analysis – Ambulance

0617-110-P4               Lower Ground Floor Plan

0617-111-P4               Ground Floor Plan

0617-112-P5               First Floor Plan

0617-113-P2               Second Floor Plan

0617-114-P1               Roof Plan

0617-200-P5               Site Sections

0617-201-P3               Site Sections

0617-300-P4               Proposed Elevations

0617-301-P4               Proposed Elevations

            Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority

3.         Notwithstanding the information already submitted, no construction works above  ...  view the full minutes text for item 19.

Demolish the existing commercial units and erect a 3-storey building for 10 residential flats

The committee was advised that this application had been deferred with the agreement of the Head of Development Management and the applicant following revisions to the NPPF on 24 July 2018.  The application would be considered at a subsequent meeting.

Demolition of existing office building and erection of a mixed-use building of part 4, part 9 and part 14 storeys comprising 41 no. residential apartments and 1,800sqm of office space

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 proposed the demolition of the existing office building and erection of a mixed-use building of part four, part nine and part 14 storeys comprising 41 residential apartments and 1,800m² of office space (Class B1a), with associated infrastructure including landscaping and basement car parking.

The Chair invited Charles Dunn, the agent, to speak for the application.  Mr Dunn advised that the scheme was largely unchanged from a previous scheme approved by the committee in April 2017.  The significant change was the addition of an underground car park.  Although this impacted on the viability of the overall scheme, the developer had committed to retaining the previously agreed commuted sum of £368,000 towards affordable housing.

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, planning permission be granted subject to the conditions listed below:

Section 106 Heads of Terms

i)          To secure a financial contribution of £368,000 towards the provision of affordable housing in the Borough of Watford;

ii)         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 allocated to this 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.         The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved drawings:-

                        2259 (90) 001

                        2259 (08) 002, 003, 004, 005, 006, 007, 008, 009,

                        2259 (07) 001, 002, 003, 004, 005, 006

                        017-03-CP1 E, CP3 C, CP6   

3.         No construction works shall commence until a detailed noise mitigation scheme for the proposed flats (to include acoustic glazing, acoustic trickle vents and mechanical purge ventilation), to protect the future occupiers from noise from rail traffic on the adjacent railway line and the plant and equipment associated with the adjacent Holiday Inn Express and Egale office building, has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall achieve the internal noise levels for individual rooms as set out in British Standard 8233: 2014.

4.         No construction works shall commence until full details and samples of the materials to be used for the external surfaces of the building (including walls, roofs, windows, doors and balconies) have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

5.         No construction works shall commence until details of the window reveals for the office glazing and the windows to the flats have been submitted to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 21.