Issue - meetings

24/1614/FUL – Demolition of existing dwelling and shed and construction of two storey detached dwelling including basement level with swimming pool and accommodation in the roofspace served by rear dormer window and front/side/rear rooflights, side s

Meeting: 20/02/2025 - Planning Committee (Item 112)

112 24/1614/FUL – Demolition of existing dwelling and shed and construction of two storey detached dwelling including basement level with swimming pool and accommodation in the roofspace served by rear dormer window and front/side/rear rooflights, side solar panels with associated heatpump, access, bin and bike store, parking and landscaping works and vehicle cross over at 20 Batchworth Lane, Northwood, HA6 3DR pdf icon PDF 552 KB

Demolition of existing dwelling and shed and construction of two storey detached dwelling including basement level with swimming pool and accommodation in the roofspace served by rear dormer window and front/side/rear rooflights, side solar panels with associated heatpump, access, bin and bike store, parking and landscaping works and vehicle cross over at 20 Batchworth Lane, Northwood.

 

Recommendation: that planning permission be granted.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The application was for demolition of existing dwelling and shed and construction of two storey detached dwelling including basement level with swimming pool and accommodation in the roof space served by rear dormer window and front/side/rear rooflights, side solar panels with associated heat pump, access, bin and bike store, parking and landscaping works and vehicle cross over at 20 Batchworth Lane, Northwood.

 

The application was before the Committee as it had been called in by Batchworth Community Council if officers were minded to approve the application. 

 

At the 23 January Planning Committee meeting Members had resolved to defer the application in order for officers to seek further clarification in respect of the extent of the glazing, and to request information on construction management including a phasing approach.  Since then, the applicant had amended the design of the front elevation which had further reduced the amount of glazing and officers remained of the view that the proposal was acceptable in terms of design.  The applicant had also provided a draft Construction Management Plan in order to address concerns about the construction process, and submission of a detailed Construction Management Plan prior to commencement of works had been conditioned.

 

The Planning Officer reported that since the publication of the agenda, additional comments had been received from residents and the Residents’ Association.  These had included comments about inconsistencies in the vehicle numbers and the suitability of the road for the construction vehicle types.  Officers considered that these had been addressed or mitigated by the requirement for a Construction Management Plan.  Additionally, officers were of the view that the detailed construction methodology (e.g. piling types) was outside the control of the planning system.

 

In terms of the Batchworth Neighbourhood Plan (BNP), the Planning Officer reported that the building would have a 72% carbon reduction over the 2021 building regulations and include photovoltaic panels and an air source heat pump, thereby optimizing energy efficiency as required by neighbourhood plan policy BW CC1.  The application had been subject to a flood risk assessment and did use SUDS for the water run-off from the site and from existing overland surface water flow; additionally the front landscape areas were retained, both of which were policy requirements within the BNP.   The proposal would also comply with policy BW DE1 requiring development to respond to local character and be of high quality design.  The application was therefore considered to be in accordance with the relevant policies of the Batchworth Neighbourhood Plan.

 

Parish Councillor Diana Barber of Batchworth Community Council spoke against the application.

 

The Chair of Eastbury Residents’ Association spoke against the application.

 

The agent spoke in favour of the application.

 

Committee Members asked questions about the details of the application which were responded to by officers.  The Committee’s discussions included the following:

 

·        Concern was raised about the potential for traffic management issues during the construction phase arising from: the proposal for vehicles used by contractors to park in neighbouring roads; the likelihood of vehicles parking too close to the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 112