Report of the Head of Development Management to consider part retrospective planning application for part single storey, part two storey rear extension, alterations to the roof.

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 a part retrospective planning application for part single storey, part two storey rear extension, and alterations to the roof including two rear dormer windows.

Attention was drawn to the update sheet, which noted that an additional letter had been received from the Cassiobury Triangle Residents’ Association.

The Chair invited Karen England from the Cassiobury Triangle Residents’ Association to speak against the application.  Mrs England described the anger of local residents about the history of decisions and appeals relating to 20 Cassiobury Park Avenue.  The latest application had been strongly opposed at the residents’ association’s Annual General Meeting in March 2017.

Mrs England outlined a number of fundamental concerns with the application, which rendered the house out of keeping with surrounding properties and with the character of the street.

Mrs England questioned how the balance of the residents’ and applicant’s human rights was determined.  Residents considered the applicant had acted with complete disregard for the planning process.  Moreover, unless substantial remedial changes were required by the committee a dangerous precedent would be set which would encourage further inappropriate and unlawful development in the area.  

The Chair invited Mr Hadawi, the applicant, to speak in support of the application.  Mr Hadawi described a period of great stress and anxiety during the on-going planning, building and appeal process. 

Citing his own inexperience and that of his building contractor, Mr Hadawi explained in detail the transformation of 20 Cassiobury Park Avenue to its current form.  This included the remedial changes to the property which had been agreed with the council’s enforcement team and were set out in the current application.

The Chair invited Cassiobury Ward Councillor, Peter Jeffree, to speak to the committee.  Councillor Jeffree underlined the frustration of local residents at the apparent manipulation of the planning system by the applicant.  The resultant design was contrary to policy UD1 of the Watford Local Plan as well as the requirements of the National Planning Policy Framework.

Whilst various remedial changes had been proposed, which were to be welcomed, Councillor Jeffree considered that these were insufficient to reduce the visual impact and dominance of the property on the street scene.

The Head of Development Management advised the committee that the purpose of planning enforcement was to take the minimum necessary remedial action to remove any planning harm.  It was not to punish an applicant for failing to follow the rules, nor to require any structures built without planning permission to be removed in their entirety.

The Chair invited comments from the committee.

The committee expressed sympathy with residents’ frustration.  The house had been changed substantially and there were legitimate grounds for concern about the resultant impact on the neighbours’ privacy and on the character and appearance of the street. 

There was agreement that the recent planning history of this property did not represent an acceptable way to manage a development.

Members of the committee accepted that, whilst opinions might differ, the council was nevertheless bound by previous rulings by the appeal inspectors.  As such, this restricted the extent of remedial changes which could be achieved.  

Some members considered that the application remained unacceptable, despite the proposed remedial changes.  Particular concerns were expressed about the roof alterations, which, even with the removal of the second floor extension and other changes to fenestration, did not diminish sufficiently the visual impact and dominance of the property.

The Chair invited Councillor Watkin to move a motion to refuse.  Councillor Watkin proposed that the application be refused on the grounds that it was an excessive development which would harm the amenity of neighbouring properties.

In accordance with Standing Committee Procedure Rules, paragraph 4.4, as an equal division of votes was cast, the Chair used his casting vote against the motion.  As a consequence, the motion was LOST.

The Chair moved the officer’s recommendation.

In accordance with Standing Committee Procedure Rules, paragraph 4.4, as an equal division of votes was cast again, the Chair used his casting vote for the officer’s recommendation. 

RESOLVED –

that planning permission be granted subject to the following conditions:

1.         The scheme shall be completed within nine months from the date of the enforcement appeal of the 1^st February 2017.

2.         All the external surfaces shall be finished in materials to match the colour, texture and style of the existing/adjoining building. In the event of matching materials not being available, 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.

3.         The development shall be carried out in accordance with drawings hereby approved 3178/APS/K unless it is agreed in writing by the local planning authority. 

4.         Notwithstanding the provisions of Article 3 of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any modification or re-enactment thereof), no other window opening on the side elevations or at roof level hereby approved shall be installed without the prior written permission of the Local Planning Authority.

5.         The recently installed windows to the side elevation at the first floor level shall be fixed and obscured 1.7m from the finished floor level.

6.         The flat roof of the proposed extensions hereby approved shall not be used as a terrace, balcony or any other amenity purposes.

Informatives

1.         This planning permission does not remove the need to obtain any separate consent of the owner of the adjoining property prior to commencing building works on, under, above or immediately adjacent to their property (e.g. foundations or guttering). The Party Wall Etc Act 1996 contains requirements to serve notice on adjoining owners of property under certain circumstances, and a procedure exists for resolving disputes.  This is a matter of civil law between the two parties, and the Local Planning Authority are not involved in such matters.  A free guide called "The Party Wall Etc Act 1996: Explanatory Booklet" is available on the website of the Department for Communities and Local Government at https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/393927/Party_Wall_etc__Act_1996_-_Explanatory_Booklet.pdf

2.         This permission does not remove the need to obtain any separate consent, which may be required under the Buildings Act 1984 or other building control legislation. Nor does it override any private rights which any person may have relating to the land affected by this decision. 

To find out more information and for advice as to whether a Building Regulations application will be required please visit www.watfordbuildingcontrol.com.

3.         You are advised of the need to comply with the provisions of The Control of Pollution Act 1974, The Health and Safety at Work Act 1974, The Clean Air Act 1993 and The Environmental Protection Act 1990.

In order to minimise impact of noise, any works associated with the development which are audible at the site boundary should be restricted to the following hours:

·                    Monday to Friday 8am to 6pm

·                    Saturdays 8am to 1pm

·                    Noisy work is prohibited on Sundays and bank holidays

Instructions should be given to ensure that vehicles and plant entering and leaving the site comply with the stated hours of work.

            Further details for both the applicant and those potentially affected by construction noise can be found on the Council's website at: https://www.watford.gov.uk/info/20010/your_environment/188/neighbour_complaints_%E2%80%93_construction_noise