There were no apologies; all Members were present.

There were no disclosures of interest.

The minutes of the meeting held on 3 April 2014 to be submitted and signed.  (All minutes are available on the Council’s website.)

The minutes of the meeting held on 3 April 2014 were submitted and signed.

A total of 3 application reports are included on this agenda for decision, of which 2 will be within the Government's target dates for determination of applications

On 14 April 2014 there were no applications over 8 weeks not yet determined but under consideration by the Development Management Section Head.

RESOLVED –

that the report be noted.

An application for the demolition of the existing factory and the erection of a new building for warehousing/light industrial use

The Committee received a report of the Development Management Section Head including the relevant planning history of the site.  No objections to the application had been received.   

The Applications Casework Manager introduced the item and drew attention to the Update Sheet which advised that Condition 6 had been amended and that two extra conditions had been attached. 

RESOLVED –

That planning permission be granted, subject to the following conditions:

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.         Construction of the development hereby permitted shall not take place before 8am or after 6pm Mondays to Fridays, before 8am or after 1pm on Saturdays and not at all on Sundays and Public Holidays.

3.                 Notwithstanding the information already submitted, no development shall commence until details of the materials to be used for all the external finishes of the building have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out only in accordance with the details approved under this condition.

4.                  The parking and manoeuvring area shall be laid out in accordance with the drawings hereby approved and shall be made available for use prior to the occupation of the building. The parking spaces and manoeuvring area shall be maintained as such at all times and shall not be used for any other purpose.

5.         No development shall commence until details of the disposal of surface water from the parking and manoeuvring area have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The building shall not be occupied until the works for the disposal of surface water have been constructed in accordance with the details approved under this condition.

6.         Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority, development other than that required to be carried out as part of an approved scheme of remediation must not commence until Conditions (a) to (d) below have been complied with. If unexpected contamination is found after development has begun, development must be halted on that part of the site affected by the unexpected contamination to the extent specified by the Local Planning Authority in writing until Condition (d) has been complied with in relation to that contamination.

(a)       Site Characterisation
An investigation and risk assessment, in addition to any assessment provided with the planning application, must be completed in accordance with a scheme to assess the nature and extent of any contamination on the site, whether or not it originates on the site.  The contents of the scheme are subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority.  The investigation and risk assessment must be undertaken by competent persons and a written report of the findings must be produced. The written report is subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority. The report of the findings must include:

(i)      a survey of the extent, scale and nature  ...  view the full minutes text for item 91.

An application to demolish the existing garages and to erect a three storey building with accommodation in the roof comprising 6 no. one bedroom flats and 4 no. two bedroom flats with car parking and amenity space and access from existing access road off Tolpits Lane

The Committee received a report of the Development Management Section Head including the relevant planning history of the site.  No objections to the application had been received.   

The Major Cases Manager drew the meeting’s attention to the Update Sheet and advised that drawings 003 and 004 had been amended.  

The Major Cases then noted that Recommendation B on the Additional Update Sheet was a requirement currently being addressed by the Council’s legal department. 

Councillor Bell said that he welcomed this development in the heart of Holywell ward and expressed his approval of the intention that all 10 flats would be for affordable rent.  He advised that the garages currently on the site had fallen into disrepair, were generally under-used and had been vandalised. 

Councillor Bell noted that the access road would be widened.  He advised that shoppers used the space behind the shops for parking and said that he hoped this fact had been taken into consideration.  He stated his concern, however, that the development seemed very high.

Councillor Brandon also expressed his overall approval for the design and the provision of additional homes in Watford.  He noted, however, that he had concerns regarding Environmental Health’s comments regarding the existing flue at the commercial kitchen which would be within 12 metres of the proposed building.  He asked whether any provision could be made to mitigate smells from this kitchen.

The Chair advised that he had similar concerns and noted Environmental Health’s comments with regard to possible complaints from future residents.  He asked whether mitigation measures could be put in place such as instigating a review within six months of completion to determine whether residents had been affected. 

The Major Cases Manager replied that two conditions were proposed which addressed these concerns (Conditions 11 and 12).  He explained that the bedroom window on the third floor at the front of the building would be sealed and non-opening; the second bedroom had been moved to the other side of the building. 

The Major Cases Manager further explained details concerning the windows of the third floor flat.  He noted that the bedrooms of this flat would be at the same level as the flues and that a mechanical ventilation system, as required by condition 12, would be installed.  He advised that the two conditions had been sufficient to satisfy Environmental Health’s concerns but that it was still possible for the Applicant to provide another design.   

Following further concerns expressed by Members, the Major Cases Manager advised that, whilst a sealed window for a bedroom was not ideal, the alternative of roof lights was not totally acceptable either.  He noted that, although with this option daylight and ventilation would be available, there would be no outlook from the bedroom.   He added that, within the third floor flat, the main living area would have opening windows; it would be only the main bedroom window which would be sealed. 

Replying to a query from Councillor Johnson, the Major Cases Manager said that both escape from  ...  view the full minutes text for item 92.

An application for an extension and for alterations to the existing store including amendment to condition 15 of planning permission 9/447/94, varied by condition 1 of planning permission 02/00588, to increase retail (Class A1) sales floorspace, relocation of ATMs and customer restaurant, ancillary concession units, alterations to car parking layout, alterations to rear service yard including new canopy to goods online parking area, new sprinkler tank and associated works and change of use from highways land to private land.

The Committee received a report of the Development Management Section Head including the relevant planning history of the site.  No objections to the application had been received.   

The Applications Casework Manager advised that the planning obligation as noted in the report had been signed and completed. 

The Chair invited Mr Dave Lazenby to address the meeting.

Mr Lazenby advised that he worked for Sainsbury’s plc and that the company wished to invest in the supermarket at the Dome Roundabout with all works to be completed by Christmas 2014.  He added that this development would represent a much needed improvement to the store which had opened in 1995 and been further developed in 2002.

Mr Lazenby explained that the building would be increased in size to the front and could then accommodate the sale of additional foods and non-foods and also items of clothing.   Mr Lazenby added that concessionary space would be available for ‘Timpsons’ and ‘Explore Learning’. 

Addressing the layout of the development, Mr Lazenby affirmed that the design would be the best solution for the site as regards parking and access requirements and would also respect the area’s residential aspect.

Mr Lazenby advised that there had been wide consultation on the application with a 100% positive response.  He said that the design embraced both sustainability and energy efficiency and would provide for 60 new jobs in store and additional positions in the concessionary outlets.  He concluded by stating that the proposal represented excellent investment in Watford.      

Councillor Johnson referred to the report and noted that Hertfordshire County Council (as Highway Authority) had projected an increase of 22 vehicles on a Saturday which would equate to one additional car per hour.  He asked for clarification on the modelling.

The Applications Casework Manager explained that the store was currently ‘overtrading’.  This meant that the sales area and the quantity and range of good were insufficient for existing customers.    In consequence, restocking of shelves was on-going throughout opening times; additional space would improve conditions for customers on the sales floor.  The Officer stressed that the store did not seek to attract additional customers. 

Councillor Brandon said that he had concerns regarding loss of trees on site and hoped that the sum of £38,000 as noted in Planning Obligation (iii) would be sufficient to improve the public realm within the vicinity of the Dome Roundabout. 

The Applications Casework Manager said that Sainsbury’s would be contributing a generous sum which would serve to improve the railway underpass to the north of the site, would partly fund a study to improve the pedestrian network and would provide additional wild flower and other planting in the vicinity.  He added that trees would be preserved thus providing a degree of concealment for the development. 

RESOLVED –

That, in consequence of a unilateral undertaking under s.106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) having been entered into to secure the contributions and other provisions set out below, planning permission be granted subject  ...  view the full minutes text for item 93.