Erection of 2 three-storey infill extensions to provide 9 additional self-contained units

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 site. 

Despite these concerns, committee members were mindful of changes to the local and national planning policy framework since the inspector’s ruling in 1990.  They acknowledged that most weight would be afforded to this framework, rather than to the inspector’s comments on the previous application, should there be an appeal against the committee’s decision.

The Chair invited Councillor Williams to propose a motion to refuse the application.  Councillor Williams proposed that the application be refused on the grounds that by way of its height, scale and massing it would adversely affect the character of the existing flats on the site and on the neighbouring residential area and as such was contrary to Policy UD1 of the Watford Local Plan Core Strategy 2006-31.

On being put to the committee, the motion was LOST.

The Chair moved the officer’s recommendation.

RESOLVED –

That planning permission be granted subject to the following 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:-

            U-PP-LP001, LP002, LP003, BP001, BP002

            U-PP-PP001, PP002, PP003, PP004, PP005

            U-PP-PE001, PE002, PE003, PE004

            U-PP-PS001

3.         No construction works shall commence until details and samples of the materials to be used for all the external finishes of the building, including walls, roofs, doors and windows have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out only in accordance with the approved materials.

4.         No development on site shall commence until the tree protection measures (including ground protection) relating to the protected trees located within the site, as detailed in the Arboricultural Impact Assessment and Method Statement by Trevor Heaps, Arboricultural Consultancy dated 18th October 2018 (Ref. TH 1669 B) have been implemented in full. The approved measures shall be maintained as such at all times whilst the construction works take place. The construction works shall only be carried out in accordance with the recommendations of this report.

5.         No dwelling hereby approved shall be occupied until the refuse, recycling and cycle storage facilities have been provided in full, in accordance with the approved drawings. These facilities shall be retained at all times thereafter and shall be used for no other purpose.

6.         No dwelling hereby approved shall be occupied until a minimum of 27 and a maximum of 36 car parking spaces have been provided in full, in accordance with the approved drawings. These parking spaces shall be retained at all times thereafter and shall only be used for the parking of cars of occupiers and visitors to the site.

7.         No external lighting shall be installed within the parking areas until a detailed lighting scheme has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The lighting scheme shall be designed to minimise light pollution and glare to the existing and proposed flats. The scheme shall only be installed in accordance with the approved details.

Informatives

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

IN910 Building Regulations.

IN911 Party Wall Act.

IN912 Hours of construction.

IN913 CIL Liability.

IN909 Street naming and numbering.