There were two changes of membership for this meeting: Councillor Watkin replaced Councillor Martins (for agenda items 7,8 and 9) and Councillor Rogers replaced Councillor Whitman.

Councillor Watkins declared an interest in agenda items 5 and 6, on which he had provided guidance to residents prior to agreeing to attend the meeting as a substitute for Councillor Martins.  He was absent from the Council Chamber for discussions on both of these items.

The minutes of the Development Management Committee held on 8 October 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.

The minutes of the meeting held on 10 October 2015 were submitted and signed.

Application to use The Parade for a Christmas Market between 19 November and 3 January.

Councillor Watkins was absent from the Council Chamber for discussions on this item.

The Committee received the report of the Senior Planning Officer, including the relevant planning history of the site and details of responses to the application.

The Application Case Work Manager provided a brief introduction, explaining that permission was sought for use of The Parade between Exchange Road flyover and Clarendon Road for an annual Christmas Market between 19 November and 3 January.  The proposed market would be positioned in the area currently occupied by casual market stalls for New Watford Market.

Councillors welcomed the application, which they felt would be a positive temporary development on the High Street and would be enjoyed by residents during the festive period around Christmas.  Councillor Rogers suggested that it would enhance trade for the existing stall holders, rather than detract from them.

However there was general concern about the lack of adequate consultation with existing stall holders regarding the siting of the Christmas Market, which might have been better located closer to the Big Skate event at the top of The Parade, or further down the High Street.  Acknowledging these concerns, Councillor Sharpe commented that the Christmas Market promoters had been in a strong position to determine their location.

The Chair moved the officer 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 annual Christmas Market use hereby approved shall not be operated outside the period 19^th November – 3^rd January and installation of the market stalls and ancillary equipment shall not commence before 9^th November and shall be completely removed from the highway by 10^th January, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

3.         No market stalls shall be open to members of the public  before 11am or after 10pm, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

4.         The market stalls and ancillary equipment hereby approved shall not encroach any further onto public highway land other than that shown on drawing Nos. WCM/1B and WCM/2/E, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

5.         The market stalls and ancillary equipment hereby approved shall be completely removable, freestanding, and not need any works to be carried out within the footpath in order to secure them.

6.         There shall be no storage of refuse bins, waste materials, boxes or packing cases on the highway, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

7.         The sound power level of the generators shall not exceed 69dB, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

8.         The development shall be carried out in accordance with the details in the application form and following drawings, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The following drawings are hereby approved: Location plan; WCM/1B; and WCM/2/E.

Informatives:

1.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 32.

Application for planning permission for proposed alterations and extensions to listed building

Councillor Watkins left the Council Chamber prior to discussions on this item, having declared an interest at the beginning of the meeting.

The Committee received the report of the Senior Planning Officer, including the relevant planning history of the site and details of responses to the application.

The Application Case Work Manager introduced this item, explaining that the application was to alter and extend a Listed Building II and as a consequence, it was necessary for the applicants to obtain both Planning Permission and Listed Building Consent.  Listed Building Consent for the proposed works had been granted in July 2015 (15/00530/LBC).

The Chair invited Mrs Dawn Ayres, a local resident, to speak to the Committee in objection to the application.

Speaking on behalf of local residents, Mrs Ayres drew the Committee’s attention to a covenant on the application site.  She expressed the view that the provisions of the covenant overrode any planning considerations. 

Local residents were concerned that the Council was failing to carry out its duty to protect and preserve a listed building.  The planned alterations were too numerous and inappropriate, and would remove any access to the rear of the property.  They were also concerned that the applicant had failed to comply with the conditions of the previous planning consent (15/00530/LBC).

In addition, residents were concerned that construction work would cause major disruption and that there was inadequate access to the site for construction deliveries.

The Chair thanked the speaker for her comments and drew the Committee’s attention to a written submission from Councillor Topping, Nascot Ward Councillor, which had been emailed to members prior to the meeting.  He then opened the debate to Committee members. 

Councillor Sharpe observed that it was important to note that South Lodge was listed in 1983, prior to which there had been some alteration to the property.  Some of these alterations had not been in keeping with the original character of the building and may have been unlawful.  Looking at the current application, it was important to consider why the building had been listed and whether the proposals would damage or undermine the reasons for that listing.

Taking up this point, Councillor Bashir observed that the property was currently in a state of some disrepair.  The planned alterations would improve and restore the appearance and he was supportive of the application.

The Chair sought clarification from the Interim Development Management Section Head on the relative authority of a covenant over planning law.  She advised that covenants sat outside planning law and therefore outside the remit of the Committee.  In addition, she addressed residents’ concerns about the lack of compliance, to date, with the conditions of the previous planning consent (15/00530/LBC), confirming that a period of three years was given to provide supplementary information.  It would be a criminal offence for works to commence prior to the proper discharge of the relevant conditions.

The Chair moved the officer recommendation.

RESOLVED –

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

1          The  ...  view the full minutes text for item 33.

Application to construct a new single storey dwelling.  Creation of a shared vehicular access from the eastern residential section of Hempstead Road to replace the existing vehicular access from the A411 Hempstead Road.

Councillor Watkins had left the Council Chamber prior to discussions on this item, having declared an interest at the beginning of the meeting.

The Committee received the report of the Senior Planning Officer, including the relevant planning history of the site and details of responses to the application.

The Application Case Work Manager introduced this item, explaining that planning permission was sought for the erection of a new flat-roofed bungalow on land that was currently the end of the rear garden of a Grade II listed building.  The plans included a “green” roof of sedum plants. 

The Chair invited Mrs Dawn Ayres, a local resident, to speak to the Committee in objection to the application.

Mrs Ayres reiterated that she was speaking on behalf of residents, who had welcomed the withdrawal of a previous planning application (15/00529/FUL) for a two-storey building on the site.  However concerns remained about the current application. 

Mrs Ayres commented that she did not intend to cover the points raised in her previous representation to the Committee, but she wished for these to be borne in mind by members as they considered the current application. 

Additional concerns had been expressed by residents about the overdevelopment of the site as well as the design of the bungalow, which, it was considered, was out of keeping with the character of South Lodge and would detract from the Grade II listed building.  Moreover the proposed “green” roof was unsightly and impractical.  

Local residents questioned the applicant’s access rights over the grass verge, which was understood to be the subject of a covenant protecting it from development. 

On a practical level, there were concerns about adequate access during construction, in addition to considerations such as the storage of building materials.

Thanking the speaker for her comments, the Chair drew the Committee’s attention once again to the written submission from Councillor Topping, Nascot Ward Councillor. 

The Chair asked the Application Case Work Manager to clarify the issues surrounding access rights over the grass verge.  He advised that the verge was part of the public highway and therefore the responsibility of Hertfordshire County Council (HCC).  If permission were granted to put a crossover in place, the applicant would be required to cover the cost of the works which would be undertaken by HCC licensed contractors.

Councillor Hofman was invited to speak to the Committee as Ward Councillor for Nascot.  He added his concerns about the proposed design of the bungalow, which would detract from the setting of the listed building.  There were also issues about the potential loss of trees.

The Chair opened the debate to Committee members.

Councillors expressed misgivings about back garden developments, which were understood to require proper access and to be of good design, and the precedent that would be set if this application were approved.  Despite these concerns, they were reminded by the Interim Development Management Section Head that planning rules did not preclude developments in the curtilage of a dwelling or back garden.

Councillor Johnson  ...  view the full minutes text for item 34.

Application to demolish existing Tile Depot and Harp Windows showroom buildings and redevelop to provide a new mixed use development providing eight residential units and one ground floor retail space of 251sqm.

The Committee received the report of the Major Cases Manager, including the relevant planning history of the site and details of responses to the application.

In his introduction to this item, the Major Cases Manager explained that the application involved the demolition of the existing commercial buildings and the erection of a new, three-storey building comprising a retail unit at ground floor and eight residential flats above.  Six car parking spaces were provided at ground floor level, with access from Aldenham Road.  The proposal has been amended since it was first submitted, following discussions with officers and the receipt of objections.

The Chair invited Mr Gary Hays, the Managing Director of Harp Windows, to speak in objection to the application.

Mr Hays advised that in 2002 he had taken a lease on 30 Aldenham Road, which was used as a business showroom.  This now generated approximately 80% of his business.  He expressed a range of objections to the proposed development:

1.      future parking provision.  Currently there was a flexible parking arrangement in place, whereby spaces were shared with neighbouring businesses.  There were existing parking pressures in the area, particularly from commuters using Bushey station.  The proposal would reduce the number of spaces available and present difficulties for deliveries to the retail outlets;

2.      flooding.  The car park was flooded regularly and this had impacted on the shops and adjoining properties.  The Council had a duty to alleviate this problem;

3.      light and privacy.  The new development would reduce the amount of light reaching the rear of the buildings and there were issues about overlooking in surrounding buildings;

4.      air quality.  There were concerns about air quality in this area and the siting of the residential development was considered unsuitable;

5.      design.  The appearance of the building was not in keeping with the surrounding area; and

6.      organisation of the flats, which looked cramped.

The Chair then invited Mr Peter Smith from Stephen Davy Peter Smith Architects, to speak to the Committee in support of the application.

Responding to the issues raised by Mr Hays, Mr Smith commented that the Committee needed to address material planning matters rather than the business concerns of the previous speaker. 

A number of changes had been made to the proposal following representations made to planning officers.  These included amendments to the number of flats, the design of the roof, air quality and privacy concerns.  He was unaware of any flooding issues in the area.

Mr Smith reminded the Committee that Watford suffered from an acute lack of housing.  This site was underdeveloped and could help to alleviate the problem.

The Chair thanked the speakers for their contributions and invited Councillor Taylor, Oxhey Ward Councillor, to speak.

Councillor Taylor drew the Committee’s attention to congestion and parking issues in the Aldenham Road area.  The development would exacerbate the problem with the loss of spaces serving the retail outlets.  He questioned whether it would be possible to alter the works start time, particularly in regard to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 35.

Application to demolish ten existing bungalows and erect two, three storey blocks comprising 32 one and two bedroom flats and a community garden.

The Committee received the report of the Major Cases Manager, including the relevant planning history of the site and details of responses to the application.

Introducing the item, the Major Cases Manager explained that the application involved several elements: the demolition of the existing 10 bungalows; the erection of two L-shaped, three storey blocks; the widening and improvement of the pedestrian entrance to the recreation ground; the closure and stopping up of the highway in front of the bungalows and incorporation of land into a public open space in front of the flats; and the provision of new car parking.

The Major Cases Manager also drew the Committee’s attention to the update sheet which included a number of amendments to the report. 

The Chair invited Mrs Jane Owen of Save the Bungalows to speak in objection to the application.

Mrs Owen stated that she was speaking on behalf of the Leavesden Green community, the majority of whom were opposed to the application.  517 people had signed a petition against the proposed development, which they considered to be hideous and quite out of keeping with the character of the existing buildings. 

The proposed flats were thought to be too high (98% higher than the bungalows and 30% higher than the existing houses) and would have the effect of making the area feel cramped and overdeveloped.  There were concerns about a loss of privacy.

Residents also had issues about the loss of green space and the encroachment the development would make onto the children’s play area.  This would set a precedent for other developments.

There were significant concerns about the proposal to close part of Hemming Way and the detrimental impact the development would have on parking in the area.  The accuracy of the parking survey was questioned.

Local residents also expressed doubts about the ability of the local sewerage system, as well as local schools and doctors surgeries, to cope should the development be approved. 

The Chair then invited Mrs Lisa Cathro from Watford Community Housing Trust (WCHT) to speak for the application.

Mrs Cathro outlined the benefits of the proposed development, which, using an exchange of land with Watford Borough Council, represented a new vision for the Leavesden Green estate.

The development would provide a net gain of 22 affordable homes, a new entrance to the park and a restructuring of the local roads to connect residents to the recreation area.  The design was of high quality and unit sizes would be above minimum standards.

The Trust had undertaken a series of consultations with local residents, whose views had been taken on board.  As a consequence, a number of changes had been made to the parking arrangements, to the appearance of the buildings and to security.

Responding to criticism of the treatment of bungalow residents, Mrs Cathro underlined the Trust’s sympathy with the upheaval moving represented.  She highlighted the positive feedback received from some of those affected.  However, it was important to focus on the material planning issues of the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 36.

Application to demolish 10 bungalows, existing shopping parade and residential accommodation above, estate office, MOT service garage and 27 garages plus garages/stores and construct 133 new dwellings, new shops plus associated works to landscape, parking and service access roads.

The Committee received the report of the Major Cases Manager, including the relevant planning history of the site and details of responses to the application.

The Chair invited Sue Gordon from Friends of the Meriden to speak in objection to the application.

Speaking on behalf of residents, Mrs Gordon expressed significant concern at the application, which was considered out of scale and overbearing.  Whilst the need for more housing was widely understood, these plans would remove over 70% of the green space in the central area.

The development would produce a major increase in parking and rat running problems on the estate.  Residents were concerned that the traffic surveys had not adequately recorded and predicted these impacts, exacerbating other concerns about the proposed shared surface area, which was considered hazardous.

The redevelopment would destroy the community feel of the area, uprooting people to re-house them in soulless tower blocks.

Residents were also concerned about the impact of the redevelopment on local amenities.  The Meriden Estate was not well served by public transport and local people relied on the shops on the estate.

The Chair then invited Mr Garreth Lewis from WCHT to speak in support of the application.

Mr Lewis reported that this application sought to re-establish a vibrant community in Meriden, using the assets of the area to make a positive contribution to the current housing shortage in Watford.  The 74 affordable homes proposed exceeded the Council’s declared target by a considerable margin.  The application also included an important specialist accommodation block.

Residents had been widely consulted by the Trust.  This had led to a number of changes to the application, including the introduction of some bungalows, greater variation in the roof lines, proposals to keep certain community groups together and assistance for existing retailers.

The result was a major scheme which met or exceeded Council requirements in all areas.

The Chair then invited the Major Cases Manager to provide an overview for the Committee.  He explained that the application would involve the demolition of all existing buildings within the application site and the erection of 11 new blocks.  This would provide 133 new dwellings, including a 50 bed extra care scheme and new shops.  Associated work would be undertaken to the landscape, parking and service access roads.

Following his introduction, the Major Cases Manager drew the Committee’s attention to the update sheet, which contained some additional consultation comments from Environmental Health.  In the light of these comments, two further conditions had been proposed.

The Chair thanked the speakers and invited Councillor Hastrick, Meriden Ward Councillor, to speak to the Committee.

Councillor Hastrick commented that she had previously been on the board of the WCHT, but was no longer the Council’s representative on this body.

She acknowledged the need for more affordable housing in Watford, but had grave concerns about the density and design of the proposed development. 

Residents loved the estate’s openness and green space.  The large blocks had been made less obtrusive by their  ...  view the full minutes text for item 37.