The committee will take items in the following order:

1.      All items where people wish to speak and have registered with Democratic Services.

2.      Any remaining items the committee agrees can be determined without further debate.

3.      Those applications which the committee wishes to discuss in detail.

Apologies were received from Councillor Bell.

Councillor Watkin stated that he had an interest in item in minute 20 so would abstain.

Councillor G Saffery stated that as he had publically spoken out against the application referred to in minute 21 prior to joining the committee.   He had sought legal advice and would excuse himself from the item.

The minutes of the meeting held on 31 October 2023 to be submitted and signed.

The minutes from the meeting on 31 October 2023 were approved and signed.

The Development Management Lead delivered her team’s report. 

The Chair thanked the officer and invited Andrew Mortimer, local resident, to speak against the application.

Mr. Mortimer asked the committee to look at the report while he ran though his points.  He highlighted that there would be a considerable loss of light to the kitchen and dining room; he stated that this was where he and his wife spend a lot of the day.  He went on to state that the proposed development would add 16% to the overall size of number 64, and called it a wraparound rebuild

Mr. Mortimer then clarified that the boundary wall belonged to him and was not shared with number 64.  He indicated that construction of the proposed extension would result in a loss of outlook and the loss of the vast majority of daylight to his kitchen window, replacing the view with that of a blank wall only two and a half metres from the window, and that the westerly evening sunlight would be completely lost.

The Chair thanked Mr. Mortimer.  He stated that the boundary wall was not a planning issue and to be sorted out outside of this committee.  He asked the planning officer to comment on the assumptions around use, daylight and the outlook aspects.

The Development Management Lead stated that the value of the window was taken in to account in relation to the overall living areas available in the property, she continued to say that a lot of the BRE assessments would not apply as the window was north facing.   In relation to the use of the room, members of the development team had visited the property; they were aware that the window was affected but this had to be taken in to consideration in relation to the property as a whole and balanced against the rights of the neighbours to develop.

The Chair thanked the Development Management Lead and invited Mrs. Jenita Gamil, the applicant, to speak in favour of the application.

Mrs. Jenita Gamil thanked everyone.  She stated that every planning decision had been made to cater for their two young children, to allow for both Mrs. Gamil and her husband to work from home and to allow her parents, who were elderly and ill, to live with them.  She continued that the home was almost one hundred years old and required many urgent works including to the roof that would be included in this development.  Mrs. Gamil stated that it would elevate the property and would be more energy efficient while keeping the character of the property.  She continued that, there had been complaints from the neighbour and their neighbour’s friends far and wide and that given the windows orientation it did not currently receive much light, and with the white render on the extension light would be reflected back.  She finished by stating that it was an optimal and energy effective design, which was compliant with the guidance and would generally enhance the stature  ...  view the full minutes text for item 17.

The Planning Officer delivered his report to the committee.

The Chair thanked the Planning Officer and invited Mrs. Jenny Worrell, local resident, to speak against the application.

Jenny Worrell introduced herself. She stated that she lived next to the proposed site and was raising concerns for the local area, herself and other residents to whom she had spoken.  She stated that there were seven garages currently located on the site, and the redevelopment would mean that vans and trucks would be serviced coming off the M1/M25 three hundred and sixty five days a year, twenty four hours a day, and that rapid charging stations like this were usually on commercial sites or in service stations.  She reiterated that it was  a residential area and therefore not appropriate.  Mrs. Worrell explained that rapid chargers were not designed for small vehicles.  She indicated that all the houses around there had driveways for charging their own vehicles so she disputed the claim that it was for local residents.  In particular, she was concerned about damage to property.  There was a similar development underway slightly further up the road in Sainsbury’s’ car park which had already had complaints from nearby flats in relation to the construction, noise and vibrations.  This development would place Ultra chargers two metres from her house, which also ignored the maintenance strip to allow repairs to her property.  In addition to this, they would suffer a loss of privacy and have increased noise pollution.  She finished by citing the fire risk, and referenced the recent large fire at Luton Airport with explosions and toxic fumes being common with fires relating to electric vehicles. 

The Chair thanked the resident; he asked officers if there would be any option for the hours to be limited.

The Development Management Manager stated that given the nature of use this would be very difficult to enforce.

The Chair thanked the Development Management Manager, and invited Mr. Andrew Ryley to speak in favour of the application and requested he respond to the points raised by the residents.

Mr. Andrew Ryley introduced himself and the development company; Leap 24.  He stated that they had previously constructed 20 rapid charging stations across the Netherlands and Germany and that they were currently developing others in the UK.  He indicated that these were vital to create a greener future, which was essential to the central government’s strategy; Watford was currently in the bottom 20% of authorities to achieve this.  He stated that it would cater for a range of vehicles, including cars, vans and small trucks and that the proposal was aligned with the council’s green and sustainability policies.  Mr. Ryley also discussed a number of the issues raised by the resident, insisting that it was a suitable site and that this had been agreed with the planning officer.  Furthermore, the noise would be low as confirmed by the Environmental Health Officer.  He also stated that in relation to the objection there would be higher fences, and confirmed the opening  ...  view the full minutes text for item 18.

The Development Management Lead delivered their report to the committee.

The Chair thanked the Development Management Lead, as there were no comments from the committee, the Chair moved for the committee to vote on the officer’s recommendation that planning permission be  granted.

On being put to the committee, the application was granted. 

RESOLVED –

That planning permission be granted subject to the following conditions:

1. Approved drawings

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

     AR01 Rev A,

AR03 Rev A,

Site location plan.

2. Use

The outbuilding hereby approved shall be used only for purposes incidental to the residential use of the main house. It shall not be used for any other purpose and shall not be occupied as habitable accommodation or as an independent dwelling.

Councillor Watkin left the meeting.

The Principal Planning Officer delivered their report to the committee.

The Chair thanked the Principal Planning Officer and invited Matt Guest to speak in favour of the application.

Matt Guest introduced himself and stated he and his company had worked closely with officers to deliver a high quality proposal and they had addressed many of the issues that had been raised during the application process.  They had also worked with other relevant agencies to ensure a high quality design.  He continued to highlight some of the benefits of the proposal, including the use of a brownfield site to offer local residents and businesses a new high quality self-storage, which would also, create employment opportunities.  He pointed out that it was a modern and sustainable building, the design of which had taken a green approach and was nearing BREEAM Excellent standards.  In addition to which it offered a 14% bio net gain, which was exceeding the 10% recommended.

The Chair thanked Matt Guest and invited the committee to speak.

Councillor Trebar stated that, speaking as a local councillor for the area, storage was much needed and that she liked the design and welcomed the bio-diversity aspect.

Other members of the committee echoed these comments.

The Chair commented that it was an unusually attractive design for a self-storage unit and agreed with the members who had spoken.

The Chair moved for the committee to vote on the officer’s recommendation that planning permission be granted.

On being put to the committee, the application was granted.

RESOLVED –

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

1. Time Limit

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

2. Approved Drawings and Documents

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

- Site Location Plan. Drawing number: 4697-00. Rev: A

- Proposed Site Plan. Drawing number: 4697-SK06(PL). Rev: U

- Proposed Floor Plans. Drawing number: 4697-SK10(PL). Rev: C

- Proposed Contextual Sections / Elevations. Drawing number: 4697-SK15(PL). Rev: O

- Proposed Contextual Sections / Elevations. Drawing number: 4697-SK16(PL). Rev: J

- Proposed Site Plan Materials. Drawing number: 4697-SK17(PL). Rev: J

- Proposed Lower Ground Floor Plan. Drawing number: 4697-SK21(PL). Rev: A

- Proposed Upper Ground Floor Plan. Drawing number: 4697-SK22(PL). Rev: A

- Proposed Roof Plan. Drawing number: 4697-SK23(PL). Rev: - Page 51

- Proposed Elevations. Drawing number: 4697-SK24(PL). Rev: E

- Proposed Section. Drawing number: 4697-SK27(PL). Rev: C

- Proposed Plan Fence Treatment. Drawing number: 4697-SK28(PL). Rev: D

- Arboricultural Impact Assessment. Drawing number: 002

- Landscape Plan. Drawing number: 1303. Rev: J

- Stormwater Drainage Design. Drawing number: 22073-SWD-DP-01. Rev: P05

- Tree Survey Plan: Drawing number: 002

3. Local Lead Flood Authority - Drainage Details

No development shall commence until detailed drainage calculations and construction  ...  view the full minutes text for item 20.

The Development Management Manager delivered his report to the committee.

The Chair thanked the Development Management Manager and invited the committee to discuss the application. 

Councillor Pattinson noted that the application was very positive and stated that she would support it. 

The Chair echoed these thoughts and moved for the committee to vote on the officer’s recommendation that planning permission be granted.

On being put to the committee, the application was granted.

RESOLVED –

That planning permission be granted subject to the conditions below:

1. The development to which this permission relates shall be begun before 20 May 2024.

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

1445/P/1A, 1445/P/2, 1445/P/3, 1445/P/4A, 1445/P/5A, 1445/P/6A

3. The development shall only be carried out in accordance with the approved construction management plan under ref. 23/00937/DISCON. The approved plan shall be implemented at all times during development works.

4. The development shall be carried out only in accordance with the approved external materials under application ref. 23/00937/DISCON.

5. The development shall only be carried out in accordance with the Arboricultural Method Statement and Tree Protection Plan by DCCLA (dated March 2021). The tree protection measures approved under this condition shall be implemented prior to the commencement of any works and shall be maintained as such at all times whilst the construction works take place.

6. No development approved by this planning permission shall commence until a remediation strategy to deal with the risks associated with contamination of the site has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. This strategy will include the following components:

1) A preliminary risk assessment which has identified:

? All previous uses;

? Potential contaminants associated with those uses;

? A conceptual model of the site indicating sources, pathways and receptors; and

? Potentially unacceptable risks arising from contamination at the site.

2) A site investigation scheme, based on (1) to provide information for a detailed assessment of the risk to all receptors that may be affected, including those off site.

3) The results of the site investigation and the detailed risk assessment referred to in (2) and, based on these, an options appraisal and remediation strategy giving full details of the remediation measures required and how they are to be undertaken.

4) A verification plan providing details of the data that will be collected in order to demonstrate that the works set out in the remediation strategy in (3) are complete and identifying any requirements for longer-term monitoring of pollutant linkages, maintenance and arrangements for contingency action.

Any changes to these components require the written consent of the local planning authority. The scheme shall be implemented as approved.

7. No development shall commence until a monitoring and maintenance plan in respect of contamination, including a timetable of monitoring and submission of reports to the Local Planning Authority, has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. Reports as specified in the approved plan,  ...  view the full minutes text for item 21.

The Development Management Manager delivered their report to the committee.

The Chair thanked the Development Management Manager, he commended the application. As there were no comments from other members of the committee the Chair moved for the committee to vote on the officer’s recommendation that planning permission be granted.

On being put to the committee, the application was granted.

RESOLVED –

That planning permission be granted subject to the following conditions:

1. Time limit

The development to which this permission relates shall be begun before 7th December 2025.

2. Approved drawings and documents

The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved drawings and documents:

- 0395-A100 SITE PLANS

- 0395-A101 EXTG PLANS

- 0395 A107

- F22002_02 REV A

- F22002_03 REV A

- F22002_04 REV A

- F22002_05 REV A

- 0395-A140/B PROPOSED GA FLOORPLANS (UNITS 1-3)

- 0395-A300 EXTG N&S ELEVATIONS

- 0395-A301 EXTG E&W ELEVATIONS

- 0395-A301/B PROPOSED ELEVATIONS (UNITS 1-3)

- 0395-A130/A PROPOSED COORDINATED SITE PLAN (UNITS 1-3)

- 0395 CAR PARK SITE

- 0395-A200 SECT 1 & 2 (REV A).

- 0395-A102 PROPOSED SITE PLANS (REV A).

- 0395-A105 PROPOSED PLANS (UNIT 4)(REV A

- DESIGN AND ACCESS STATEMENT 1

- DESIGN AND ACCESS STATEMENT 2

- MPL TREE CONSULTANCY LTD ARBORICULTURAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT. REF. PD002248A. DATED JUNE 2022

- F22002 GREYCAINE ROAD WATFORD – TRANSPORT STATEMENT. REF. BANCROFT CONSULTING. DATED JANUARY 2022.

3. Surface Water Drainage

No construction works shall commence until a detailed surface water drainage strategy has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The strategy shall include surface water storage/attenuation for the 1 in 100 year storm event with a 40% allowance for climate change and greenfield run-off rates.

4. Materials

No development shall commence until details and samples of the materials to be used for all the external finishes of the development hereby approved, including all external walls, all roofs, doors, windows, fascias, rainwater and foul drainage goods, 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 and samples.

5. Highway Works

No unit shall be occupied until the modified access and egress arrangements for that unit, as shown in principle on the revised approved drawings F22002/02, 03, 04, 05, has been completed in full.

6. Car Parking

The development hereby approved shall not be occupied until the new on-site car parking spaces and manoeuvring areas have been constructed and laid out in accordance with the approved drawings. The vehicular access and onsite car parking spaces and manoeuvring areas shall be retained at all times thereafter unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

7. EV charging points

The development hereby approved shall not be occupied until 20% active electric vehicle charging points and 80% passive vehicle charging points have been provided in accordance with the approved drawings. The electric charging infrastructure shall be  ...  view the full minutes text for item 22.