Agenda and minutes

Agenda and minutes

Venue: Town Hall

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

Items
No. Item

48.

Apologies for absence/committee membership

Minutes:

There was a change of membership for this committee; Councillor Collett replaced Councillor Sharpe and Councillor Bolton replaced Councillor Watkin.

49.

Disclosure of interests

Minutes:

Councillor Williams advised that he had met with residents of Ellwood Court to discuss policy and processes, but had not disclosed his position on application 18/01286/FUL.

50.

Minutes

The minutes of the meeting held on 7 November 2018 to be submitted and signed.

Minutes:

The minutes of the meeting held on 7 November 2018 were submitted and signed.

51.

18/01286/FUL Ellwood Court, Ellwood Gardens pdf icon PDF 239 KB

Erection of 2 three-storey infill extensions to provide 9 additional self-contained 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) explained that the application proposed the erection of two three-storey infill extensions to provide nine additional self-contained units.  Additional car parking spaces had been provided to the rear, together with associated cycle storage, refuse and recycling facilities and hard and soft landscaping.

 

Attention was drawn to the update sheet, which included information about a daylight and sunlight assessment of the potential impact of the proposed scheme on the windows of the adjoining flats.

 

The Chair invited Ken Emmons, a local resident, to speak against the application.  Mr Emmons argued that the potential impact of the proposed development was considerable.  Residents had a range of concerns.  These included, overlooking, loss of privacy, shared party walls, parking and disruption during construction.  In addition, local people were wary of overloading the local sewerage capacity, which had been problematic previously.

 

Mr Emmons questioned why this proposed development had resurfaced, following an emphatic dismissal at appeal of a similar application in 1990 (90/00574/OUT). 

 

The Chair invited Emily Benedek, the agent, to speak for the application.  Ms Benedek described the close co-operative working undertaken with planning officers.  The result was a high quality, fully compliant scheme which would blend into the surrounding area and provide much sought after residential accommodation with high quality amenity space.

 

Additional benefits to existing residents would include increased parking to provide at least one parking space per flat, and better bin and cycle storage arrangements.

 

The Chair invited Stanborough Ward Councillor Derek Scudder to speak to the committee.  Councillor Scudder returned to the reasons for refusal of the 1990 scheme, in particular the suggested “monolithic” appearance of the proposed structure.  He argued that the proposed development would be equally overbearing and represented an overdevelopment of the site to the detriment of surrounding properties. 

 

Councillor Scudder refuted the sunlight and daylight assessment and argued that the mitigating factors outlined in the officer’s report were inadequate.

 

In a clarification, the Development Management Team Leader advised that government planning policy and the need for housing delivery had changed considerably since 1990.  This had a particular impact on housing density and the efficient use of land.  The separation distances between the proposed flats remained extensive, exceeding the minimum requirement of 27.5m.  As such, the scale and design of the proposed development was appropriate could not be described as overbearing.

 

The Chair invited comments from the committee.

 

Members of the committee sympathised with residents’ concerns about the development, particularly its design which would change the appearance of the street scene and diminish the sense of openness currently enjoyed by residents.  They were also critical of the images provided by the developer, which did little to aid their decision-making.

 

Some committee members questioned the need for an assessment of the impact on local wildlife, particularly bats and badgers reported to be on the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 51.

52.

18/01141/FULH 26, Courtlands Drive pdf icon PDF 81 KB

Erection of a single storey detached garden outbuilding (part retrospective) for incidental use to serve a swim spa/pool and sauna

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 advised that the application (part retrospective) sought the erection of a single storey detached garden outbuilding for incidental use to serve as a swim spa/pool and sauna with ancillary WC, shower and changing facilities.

 

The Chair invited Collin Welling, a local resident, to speak against the application.  Mr Welling explained the frustration of local residents regarding this development, which had continued despite objections by planning officers and in disregard to the plans and design details submitted with the application.  This had included the unauthorised removal of a mature tree with a tree preservation order.

 

With the agreement of the Chair, Mr Welling circulated some photographs to the committee.

 

Neighbours were concerned about the personal abuse they had received from the applicant and urged the committee to consider the wider implications of permitting this type of unauthorised back garden development in the future.

 

The Chair invited Steven Peters, the applicant, to speak for the application.  Mr Peters refuted the claims of local residents, explaining that he had worked with the council’s planning and enforcement officers to devise and build what he had understood to be a permissible scheme.  The building replaced an existing structure and was intended to be used for recreational purposes only.

 

He further advised that the mature tree (with preservation order) had been removed after taking advice from the arboricultural officer and had since been replaced.

 

The Chair invited Nascot Ward Councillor Jane Johnson to speak to the committee.  Councillor J Johnson was critical of the applicant, who she argued had deliberately flouted planning rules, intimidating neighbours and ignoring the advice of officers, in order to build a large structure which was intended to be used as a self-contained dwelling.  Granting retrospective permission would send a green light to similar developments in the borough.

 

Councillor J Johnson suggested that a decision on the application be deferred until the s.106 agreement set out in the officer’s report had been signed.  In addition, she asked for the minutes to record that, if retrospective planning permission were granted, officers should actively monitor the structure to ensure that it was being used appropriately.  Should this fail to be the case, prompt enforcement action should be taken.

 

In a clarification, the Development Management Team Leader confirmed that the s.106 undertaking went with the land and would therefore apply to subsequent owners of the property.  The existence of the s.106 undertaking would enable the council to go directly to the courts should a breach occur.

 

Although some members of the committee expressed concern about reports of intimidation by the applicant towards his neighbours, it was acknowledged that the committee’s role was to consider the planning merits and not to arbitrate between the parties. 

 

Following further advice from the Development Management Team Leader, committee members considered that the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 52.

53.

18/00973/VAR Rembrandt House, Whippendell Road pdf icon PDF 759 KB

Variation of Condition 15 of planning permission ref. 14/00992/VAR to amend the landscaping and hardstanding to provide additional car parking on the decked car park

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) explained that the application proposed a variation of Condition 15 of planning permission ref. 14/00992/VAR to amend the landscaping and hardstanding at the development to provide additional car parking on the decked car park for the use of residents of the development.

 

The Chair invited David Howells, the applicant, to speak for the application.  Mr Howells explained the consultation which had been carried out in response to the committee’s concerns expressed on 3 October 2018.  The revised planting scheme was intended to soften the views of the car park and provide extra screening for residents.

 

The Chair moved the officer’s recommendation.

 

RESOLVED –

 

That planning permission be granted subject to the conditions listed below. As the development approved under planning permission ref. 14/00992/VAR has now been completed, with the conditions having been discharged and the requirements of accompanying Section 106 agreement having been satisfied, only those conditions specific to the application and any relevant enduring conditions need to be imposed.

 

Conditions

 

1.         The development shall be retained in accordance with the following approved drawings, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority:

 

            Site location plan

            1248_PLN_602A, 603A, 604A, 605A, 606A, 607, 608A, 609A, 610A, 611, 612A, 613, 614A.

            3173/PL 111C, 114A, 121A, 122A, 123A, 124A, 125A.

            1248_CON600_D01, J01, J02, K01, K02, L01, L02 and M01.

 

2.         The amended landscaping scheme for the upper parking deck, as shown on drawing nos. SH19186-18B by ACD, shall be implemented in full within 6 months from the date of this decision notice. Any 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.

 

3.         The soft landscaping scheme approved for the whole site under ref. 15/00106/DISCON, as detailed in the following drawings and documents (all by ACD), shall be implemented in full:

 

            Drawing no. SH19186-16A

            Soft Landscape Specification (dated April 2014)

            Landscape Management and maintenance Plan (dated June 2014)

            Drawing no. SH19186-50D

 

            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.

 

4.         The bin and cycle stores for Blocks D, J, K, L and M, as shown on approved drawing nos. 1248_CON600_D01, J01, J02, K01, K02, L01 and M01, shall be retained as approved at all times and shall not be used for any other purpose.

 

5.         The boundary treatments shown on drawing no. SH19186-16A (ACD), as approved under ref. 15/00108/DISCON, shall be retained as approved at all times, unless otherwise  ...  view the full minutes text for item 53.

54.

17/00862/FULM 85 Chalk Hill pdf icon PDF 88 KB

Demolition of existing disused bank building and replacement with new residential development which includes 11 new dwellings: 9 x apartments, 1 x duplex apartment, and 1 x 2-storey house – variation of s106 heads of terms

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 Chair proposed that this item and the following be considered together as they were linked applications.  This was agreed by the committee.

 

The Principal Planning Officer (CO) explained that the application proposed the demolition of the existing disused bank building and its replacement with a new residential development which included 11 new dwellings comprising: nine apartments; one duplex apartment; and one two-storey house, with associated gardens and car parking.  Members were being asked to consider a variation of the s106 heads of terms.

 

The Chair invited Simon Warner, the agent, to speak for the application.  Mr Warner explained that since receiving planning permission on 28 February the applicant had been disappointed to conclude that it would not be able to provide the affordable rented units at the linked St John’s Road site (the subject of 17/01619/FUL). 

 

Viability appraisals had confirmed the national and local economic uncertainty which was affecting house prices as well as the developer’s ability to provide a financial contribution in lieu.  Mr Warner confirmed that a review mechanism had been agreed. 

 

The Chair invited comments from the committee.

 

Members of the committee expressed disappointment at the loss of the affordable housing element, which had previously been a considerable bonus to the council.  It was requested that the applicant engage in full open book accounting towards the end of the project, when actual build costs and sales values of the flats were known, in order to maximise any contribution to the council’s affordable housing provision.

 

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 secure a review mechanism of the viability of the development to be undertaken towards the end of the project when actual build costs and sales values of the flats are known. This shall allow financial payment to be made towards affordable housing provision where the viability of the development can be shown to have improved to provide a financial surplus.

 

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  ...  view the full minutes text for item 54.

55.

17/01619/FUL Land Adjacent To 17 - 19 St Johns Road pdf icon PDF 62 KB

Erection of 3no, three bedroom townhouses, 1no, one bedroom apartment and 1no, 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 Principal Planning Officer (CO) explained that the application proposed the erection of three, three-bedroom townhouses, one one-bedroom apartment and one two-bedroom apartment (amended description).  Members were being asked to consider a proposed variation to the s106 heads of terms.

 

Simon Warner, the agent, had provided a commentary on this application above and declined to speak twice.

 

As this proposal was considered under the previous item, the Chair moved the officer’s recommendation.

 

RESOLVED –

 

That, pursuant to a Unilateral Undertaking under s.106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 having been completed to secure the following planning obligation, conditional planning permission be granted subject to the conditions listed below:

 

Unilateral Undertaking Planning Obligation

 

i)          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.

 

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.         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 occupation of any part of the development and shall be retained thereafter.

 

5.         No construction works above damp proof course level shall commence until details of the siting, height and type of fencing or other means of enclosure around the boundaries of the site and within the site have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.  The fencing or other means of enclosure shall be provided as approved prior to the first occupation of the dwelling hereby approved and shall be maintained as such at all times thereafter.

 

6.         Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 2015 (as amended) (or any modification or re-enactment thereof), no development permitted under Schedule 2, Part 1, Classes A, B, C, D, E, F and G of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 55.

56.

18/01437/DISCON Land at 64 and 73-77, Clarendon Road pdf icon PDF 48 KB

Details pursuant to Condition 4 (bridge design) of planning permission ref. 17/00558/FULM

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 report contained details pursuant to Condition 4 (bridge design) of planning permission ref. 17/00558/FULM.

 

Committee members welcomed the proposed design and the Chair moved the officer’s recommendation.

 

RESOLVED –

 

That the details of the design of the pedestrian bridge be approved and Condition 4 be discharged accordingly.

 

Informative

 

IN907 Consideration of the proposal in a positive and proactive manner.

57.

Vote of thanks

Minutes:

On behalf of the Development Management Committee, the Chair thanked Adrien Waite, Head of Development Management, for his expert guidance and advice to the committee and wished him well for his future career.

 

rating button