Agenda item

An application for a single storey rear extension and double storey side extension to form 2no. 2 bed flats.  This application also includes alterations to an existing outbuilding in rear garden.

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

The Senior Planning Officer outlined the proposal and advised that the room sizes for the two flats had complied with the minimum standards in place when the application had been received.   He explained that whilst, in the intervening period, new standards had been adopted, planners’ recommendations had been based on the criteria at the point of the application; he added that the room sizes mostly complied with the new standards. 

The Chair invited Mr Ken Emmons to speak to the Committee.

Mr Emmons said that he represented the residents of the Kingswood estate who wished to object to the application on grounds of road safety.  He referred to page 10 of the report and noted the response from the Highway Authority who recommended refusal. 

Mr Emmons advised that the roads in the vicinity of the proposed development were frequently used as a short-cut.  He explained that there were two schools and an Early Years Centre in the area resulting in many parents parking near by whilst dropping off or collecting children.   The proposal to partially demolish the wall at the application site would reduce parking space for road users and impact on road safety. 

Mr Emmons commented on several road safety issues as noted in the report reiterating that this area was extremely busy and a frequent ‘rat run’.  He concluded by asking that the Committee add conditions to ameliorate the situation. 

The Chair then asked Mr McAndrew to address the Committee.

Mr McAndrew explained that the property had been purchased earlier in the year to provide accommodation for a family member.  The intention had originally been to build a detached house on the side garden; this proposal, however, had not been approved.  It had subsequently been decided that this relative would live in the original house, 2 Fern Way. 

Mr McAndrew then advised that two further family members would be looking for accommodation in the near future and his aim was to provide homes for them in the flats. 

Mr McAndrew stressed that all regulations had been fulfilled.  He added that there would be no changes to the public highway other than widening the access to accommodate the driveway and that the Highway Authority had made no objection to this feature. 

Mr McAndrew concluded by stating that if approval were not granted due to safety issues connected with widening the proposed access he would consider alternative arrangements at the rear of the property. 

The Chair asked the Senior Planning Officer to comment on the Highway Authority’s views and also on alternative arrangements.  

The Senior Planning Officer confirmed that the Highway Authority had raised objections to the existing crossover being used for vehicle access on the basis that the original dropped kerb had been installed for pedestrian rather than vehicular use.  The crossover had, however, been used by vehicles for some considerable time and the current proposal would merely continue this use. 

The Senior Planning Officer added that the Highway Authority had made no objections to the proposed widening of the other access in Briar Road.  He advised that if Members had concerns regarding the Briar Road crossing being widened, a different design could be submitted which would give access via the rear service road.  The application could be granted with this further condition attached.

The Committee then discussed the application. 

Councillor Sharpe advised that applying a condition requiring an alternative arrangement for access via the rear service road rather than directly from Briar Road could make the decision vulnerable in the event of an appeal by the developer: it would be unwise to impose a condition where this was not strictly necessary.  He expressed his surprise that the Highway Authority had recommended refusal on an aspect of the development which would not be changed from its current usage. 

The Senior Planning Officer said that the Highway Authority had not wished to condone the inappropriate use of a dropped kerb.  He agreed that to impose the additional condition could make the Council vulnerable at appeal. 

The Development Management Section Head explained that when Members impose conditions, six tests must be applied.  One test related to ‘necessity’: if a condition is not necessary then this condition must not be imposed. 

In response to a question from Councillor Johnson, the Development Management Section Head advised that since the Committee would not be approving an aspect of the development which was already in existence (i.e. the continued use of the crossover for vehicular access to the front drive), the Council could not be held liable for a possible future accident. 

Councillor Watkin assured the meeting that were the Highway Authority to consider that the crossing was unsafe, it had the means to prohibit this use.  The authority had not done so in this case. 

Councillor Derbyshire said that it was important that the design blended with its surroundings.  He considered that the development would be appropriate in the locality.  Councillor Derbyshire noted that there were a number of terraces of four dwellings on this estate and that other corner semi-detached homes had been similarly extended.  He added that the current application’s design change to incorporate a front door as well as a side door was an improvement over the previous application.

On the issue of parking and access, Councillor Derbyshire agreed that since the access arrangements for the front drive were not part of the application this aspect should be disregarded. 

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 set out in the report, 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.         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.         No windows or doors, other than those shown on the plans hereby approved, shall be inserted in the walls of this development unless otherwise approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

4.         The walls shall be finished in render to match the colour, texture and style of the existing building.  If the render of the existing building (which is currently unpainted) were to be painted, the render of the development shall be painted the same colour unless otherwise approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.  The roof tiles shall resemble those used on the existing house.  The window frames (except those of the proposed roof-lights) shall be white to resemble those of the existing house. 

5.         The rear gardens shall be arranged as shown on drawing 14/VM-6B.  The two flats shall both have access to the shared rear garden and to the 2 parking spaces at the end of that shared garden.  The new fence that is to separate the two rear gardens shall not exceed 2m in height, nor shall the existing brick boundary wall have its height increased to more than 2m.  The proposed new gate connecting the rear garden of the house to the rear service road shall be installed as shown on drawing 14/VM-6B and its height shall not exceed 2m.

6.         The new section of hardstanding that is to form the parking area at the foot of the rear garden shall be constructed in such a way that any rain water falling on the hardstanding shall soak away into the soil within the site, and shall not run off onto land outside the site, nor enter public drains or sewers. 

7.         The flats shall not be occupied until the two parking spaces have been created as shown on the drawings hereby approved, including the lowering or partial removal of boundary walls to create visibility splays as shown on drawing 14/VM-6B. 

Informatives

1.         The planning officer’s full report gives more detail than is to be found in the Decision Notice.  The full report can be obtained from the Council’s website www.watford.gov.uk, where it is to be found as an appendix to the agenda of the meeting of the Development Control Committee of 28 August 2014. Alternatively a copy can be provided on request by the Regeneration and Development Department.

2.         In dealing with this application, Watford Borough Council has considered the proposal in a positive and proactive manner having regard to the policies of the development plan as well as paragraphs 186 and 187 of the National Planning Policy Framework and other material considerations, and in accordance with the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2010, as amended.  The applicant was provided with pre-application advice.

3.         The applicant is reminded that this planning permission does not obviate the need to obtain the separate consent of the owner of the adjoining property prior to commencing building works on, under, above or immediately adjacent to their property (e.g. foundations or guttering). The Party Wall Etc Act 1996 contains requirements to serve notice on adjoining owners of property under certain circumstances, and a procedure exists for resolving disputes. This is a matter of civil law between the two parties, and the Local Planning Authority are not involved in such matters. A free guide called “The Party Wall Etc Act 1996: Explanatory Booklet” is available on the website of the Department for Communities and Local Government.

4.         This planning permission is accompanied by a planning obligation in the form of a unilateral undertaking, which is binding upon the owners and their successors in title. It obliges the owners to make certain contributions to local services and infrastructure when work commences on implementing this permission. It includes an obligation to inform the Local Planning Authority when work commences by contacting the Section 106 Co-Ordinator in the Planning department.

5.         The development will involve the creation of addresses for new properties. The applicant must apply to the Council to allocate a street number or name. This is a requirement of the Public Health Act 1925. Applications for this purpose should be made to the Local Land and Property Gazetteer Officer at Watford Borough Council, Town Hall, Watford, WD17 3EX.

Drawing numbers

Site location plan; 14/VM-1; 14/VM-3; 14/VM-4A; 14/VM-5A; 14/VM-6B.