Agenda item

Demolition of existing garages and erection of five houses with associated car parking spaces, integrated garages and the provision for vehicular access and landscaping.

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 (HN) introduced the item.  He explained that the application proposed the demolition of the existing garages and the erection of five houses with associated car parking spaces, integrated garages and provision for vehicular access and landscaping.

The Chair invited Martyn Tott, a local resident, to speak against the application.  Speaking on behalf of local residents, Mr Tott argued that this was a further application in a series of similar developments in the Leaford Crescent area which had led to a significant rise in local housing density.  The application was an overdevelopment and contrary to the Watford Plan.

Residents were worried about access to the site from Leaford Crescent.  A 20mph limit had been introduced on the road, partly in response to restricted visibility around the sharp bend in the road further down from the proposed access.  The increase in traffic resulting from the development would exacerbate road safety concerns, particularly in the expectation that a further development of the site would be undertaken.

Mr Tott cited changes to the rules governing back garden developments announced in 2010.  These were intended to transform councils’ ability to prevent unwanted development on gardens where local people objected.

The Chair invited Jane Wakelin, from Wakelin Associates Architects, to speak in support of the application.  Ms Wakelin stated that additional local housing was needed and the use of residential land protected further encroachment on the green belt.

Ms Wakelin argued that the Council was not contravening changes to the guidance on back garden developments.  The proposed scheme could not be described as an overdevelopment, achieving separation distances well in excess of the Council’s own standards.  She noted that the Council’s arboricultural officer had not raised any objections to the development.

The bespoke architectural design met all planning requirements and, despite residents’ concerns about access, there had been no objections raised by the highways authority.

The Chair invited Councillor Mauthoor, Leggatts Ward Councillor to speak to the committee.  Councillor Mauthoor explained that she was both a resident and a ward councillor.  She had moved to the area, drawn by its space, greenery and peacefulness.  These had been eroded over time, with rising problems around parking, traffic, and excessive back garden developments.

Councillor Mauthoor described a close knit community.  It was strongly opposed to the proposed development, which was overbearing, would overlook existing properties and change the character of the area.

In a clarification, the Head of Development Management stated that, although the government’s announcement on back garden developments in 2010 had removed such land from the definition of “previously residential land”, other areas of policy remained unchanged.  The National Planning Policy Framework stated a presumption in favour of sustainable development, that being development which complied with the development plan.  The proposed development was considered to comply with policy H9 of the Watford District Plan 2000 and should therefore be approved.

The Chair invited comments from the committee.

Members discussed various aspects of the application, including back garden development, access to and from the site on to Leaford Crescent and the impact through loss of light on neighbouring properties.  The Head of Development Management and Development Management Team Leader responded and spoke about each of the issues raised by the committee.

Some of the committee were still concerned about the number of back garden developments, which had been undertaken in and around Leaford Crescent.  The proposed development appeared to be inappropriate, segregated from surrounding properties and out of character with the local area. 

The committee also expressed the view that the new properties would overshadow existing dwellings.

In addition, the committee expressed significant concerns about road safety, despite the silence of the highways authority on the issue, as well as officer assurances about the width of the access roads and the visibility this would afford onto Leaford Crescent. 

The Chair commented that there were no grounds for refusal on highways grounds and suggested that local councillors worked with the highways authority to discuss the issues in this area.

On being put to the committee, the officer’s recommendation was LOST.

The Chair invited Councillor Maestas to propose a motion to refuse the application.  Councillor Maestas proposed that the application be refused on the grounds that it would be segregated and did not fit in with the area.  

RESOLVED –

that planning permission be refused on the grounds that the proposed development, by reason of its siting (in a rear garden), design and layout would result in a cramped form of development which would be segregated from the surrounding properties and therefore have an appearance which is visually incongruous (given the setting) and would fail to harmonise with the character and appearance of the surrounding area. The proposal is detrimental to the visual amenity and character of the surrounding area and contrary to Policy UD1 of the Watford Local Plan Core Strategy (2006-2031) adopted 2013 and the design principles set out in National Planning Policy Framework 2012 which requires the development to enhance the character of the environment.