Apologies were received from Councillor Bashir. Councillor S Williams replaced Councillor Bashir.

There were no disclosures of interest.

The minutes of the Development Control Committee (now named the Development Management Committee) held on 14 May 2015 to be submitted and signed.

Copies of the minutes of this meeting are usually available seven working days following the meeting.

(All minutes are available on the Council’s website.)

CONDUCT OF THE MEETING

The Committee to take items in the following order:

1. All items where people wish to speak to the Committee and have registered to do so by telephoning the Democratic Services Team.
2. Any remaining items that the Committee agree can be determined without further debate.
3. Those applications where Members wish to discuss matters in detail.

The minutes of the meeting held on 14 May 2015 were submitted and signed.

Application for the erection of double storey side extension to contain internal staircase. Side roof extensions to convert hips to gables.  Installation of rear dormer. Creation of a fifth flat in loft space. Installation of external wall insulation.

The Committee received a report from the Development Management Section Head including the relevant planning history of the site and details of five responses to the application.

The Chair invited Mr Osowski to speak to the Committee in favour of the application.  

Mr Osowski stated he had lived in the Watford area and owned the property for many years. He noted that the new flat would be for his daughter.

He highlighted that the build would be highly energy efficient and well insulated. The benefits would be generated for all of the flats, not just the new one. The development itself would reuse materials which would avoid waste and reduce the need to bring new materials onto the site. He described the development as being beneficial to all occupants and the surrounding area.

The Chairman opened the debate to the Committee Members.

Councillor Turmaine questioned how the removal of the tree in the garden and its replacement with ‘shrubbery’ would be monitored. The Senior Planning Officer stated that a condition had been included in the officer’s recommendation requiring an approved plan for landscaping to avoid the whole forecourt becoming paved. However, the tree was not protected by a Tree Preservation Order so there was nothing to stop the applicant from removing the tree.

Councillor Turmaine also asked how the new flat would be excluded from the controlled parking zone and what would stop the occupant from using parking 60 seconds away, outside of the controlled parking zone. The officer noted that the s.106 agreement included a £2000 contribution towards the variation of the Watford (Watford Central Area and West Watford Area) (Controlled Parking  Zones) (Consolidation) Order 2010 so as to exclude future residents of the new flat from entitlement to resident parking permits for the controlled parking zones in the vicinity of the site in accordance with saved Policy T24 of the Watford District Plan 2000. The officer noted that there was nothing to stop the occupier of the new flat parking in non-controlled parking zones; however, most of West Watford was controlled.

Councillor Bell noted that the development had been described as a refurbishment; however, the development was essentially the creation of a new flat. He found the development difficult to oppose though he believed the proposals would leave the site cramped. He questioned whether the benefits of the development would also improve the existing flats. The officer clarified that external wall insulation would be introduced for the existing flats as well as creating a new flat in the loft space. The officer also noted that any legal issues between the landlord and the leaseholders of the existing flats were a private matter and outside the planning system.

The Chair moved the officer recommendation.

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 a financial contribution to the Council of £2000 towards the variation of the Borough of Watford (Watford Central  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.

Application for the retention of existing façade to King Street, demolition of remaining building to rear and erection of a part 4 storey, part 3 storey building to provide a ground floor Class A1/A2 unit and 25 flats with 13 parking spaces (duplicate of ref. 14/01574/FULM without the provision for affordable housing).

The Committee received a report from the Development Management Section Head including the relevant planning history of the site.

The Major Cases and Enforcement Manager stated that the application before the Committee was a duplicate of application 14/01574/FULM. The only difference was the issue of whether vacant building credit should apply to the application. He highlighted that little guidance from government existed in relation to the policy, the extent of which was set out in the officer’s report.

The officer stated that the Committee needed to ask themselves two questions. First, was the building genuinely vacant? Second, if the building was genuinely vacant, what weight should be given to the fact?

The officer stated that the purpose of the policy was to incentivise the development of vacant brownfield land; however, the property had been purchased by the developer only one month after the previous owner had closed their business and planning permission had been granted with a viability appraisal demonstrating development was viable. Thus the need for an incentive to develop the site no longer existed.

The officer highlighted that the reasons for refusal in the officer’s original recommendation needed to be amended as per the update sheet. The applicant had submitted a completed s.106 unilateral undertaking to provide the following obligations:

i)          A financial payment of £2,000 to the Council to vary the local Traffic Regulation Order to exclude the development from the controlled parking zone.

ii)         A financial payment of £1,500 for the remarking of parking bays on Granville Road outside the site.

iii)        The provision of fire hydrants, as necessary, to serve the development.

iv)        The provision of one unit of affordable housing.

Obligations i), ii) and iii) had overcome reasons for refusal 2 and 3 in the recommendation and those reasons could therefore be deleted.

Obligation iv) provided for the level of affordable housing provision that would be required if vacant building credit were to be applied to the development. For the reasons given in the report, officers did not accept that the vacant building policy applied in this case. Consequently, reason for refusal 1 in the recommendation was still relevant, although it needed to be amended to reflect the obligation to provide one unit of affordable housing.

The Chair invited Mr Simon Warner to speak to the Committee in favour of the application. 

Mr Warner stated that the definition provided by the Planning Advisory Service for vacant was “not abandoned”. Using this definition, he stated that Mecca Bingo had ceased trading on 9^th November 2014 and that the building had remained vacant since; therefore the applicant should receive a ‘vacant building credit’, contrary to the officer’s interpretation of the policy. The scheme offered developers a financial credit equivalent to the existing gross floorspace of relevant vacant buildings being brought back into use when the Local Planning Authority calculated any affordable housing contribution to be sought.

Mr Warner also highlighted case law and ministerial statements which supported his submissions, describing his interpretation  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

At the end of the meeting, the Chair took the opportunity to sincerely thank David Noble, the Development Management Section Head who was retiring. The Chair noted that Members and indeed the town owed Mr Noble a great deal. Under Mr Noble’s stewardship the development of the town had come a long way.

Mr Noble noted that it was amazing to look back at the changes which had taken place in the planning system over the last five years, which had been a lot for both officers and Members to take on board. He described his experience serving numerous committees as a senior local planning officer for the last 30 years as a privilege, with his involvement in Watford being the best he had been a part of. He commended Members for their hard work and for not shirking the difficult and unpopular decisions. He noted that Members had made his time very easy for which he was thankful.