Agenda item

An application for the demolition of 24 flats, shop and community building and removal of garages and creation of 56 new 1, 2 and 3 bed homes consisting of two to three storey buildings together with new shop, community facilities including community gardens, parking, landscaping and alterations to main carriageway (Duplicate application to Three Rivers District Council)

The Committee received a report of the Development Management Section Head including the relevant planning history of the site and details of thirteen letters in response to the application.

The Major Cases and Enforcement Manager introduced the application and drew the meeting’s attention to the Update Sheet.  He noted that an additional representation had been received and that comments from Watford Borough Council’s (WBC) Head of Democracy and Governance had been included in the update sheet.  

The Major Cases and Enforcement Manager advised that the bat survey had been completed.  The survey reported that a bat roost had been discovered in one of the buildings to be demolished and that the Bat Group considered that it was possible that bats were also occupying another building which was not scheduled for demolition.  An additional recommendation (Condition 18) was included on the Update Sheet. 

The Major Cases and Enforcement Manager then noted that the majority of homes on the estate lay within Three Rivers District Council’s (TRDC) boundaries thus making TRDC the lead authority.  He advised that TRDC was not proposing to use Section 106 monies for affordable housing; but that this funding would be used to secure 11 such dwellings in Watford. 

The Major Cases and Enforcement Manager concluded by recommending approval for the application subject to the inclusion of a new Condition 18 and the Planning Obligation.  

The Chair then addressed the meeting and invited Councillor Watkin, a member of the Committee, to put forward a suggested proposal.

Councillor Watkin said that the current application was exceptionally complex and suggested that a site visit for Members accompanied by planning officers would be wise.  This would then clarify for Members which areas were part of WBC and which part of TRDC.  He explained that although he had visited the site he had found it difficult to interpret the plans without the benefit of officers’ assistance. 

Councillor Watkin noted that the planning committee at TRDC had visited the site and proposed that the decision be deferred until a visit had been arranged for WBC’s Development Control Committee members, who should be accompanied by officers. 

Councillors Williams and Bashir both expressed their agreement with this proposal. 

The Chair asked for clarification from the Committee with regard to the benefit they considered would ensue from a visit with officers. 

Councillors Bell and Connal both said that they had found it difficult to assess each council’s boundaries and were consequently unsure which areas were the responsibility of WBC.  They considered that a visit with officers would assist in understanding the impact the proposed development would have. 

Councillor Sharpe agreed that the Committee needed to be clear which areas of the entire site were within WBC’s boundaries.  He felt that deferral could be useful if greater understanding would be achieved through a site visit. 

The Chair also considered that deferral would be wise as a more informed decision could be reached after a site visit.

The Chair MOVED that the application be DEFERRED.

On being put to the Committee, the Motion was CARRIED.

RESOLVED –

that the application be deferred pending a site visit for the Development Control Committee and planning officers.