Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Stephen King, Harry Davies, Debbie Morris and Philip Hearn.

The substitutes were Councillors Stephen Cox, Keith Martin, Andrea Fraser and Reena Ranger respectively.

To confirm as a correct record the minutes of the Planning Committee meeting held on 22 May 2025.

The minutes of the meeting of the Planning Committee held on 22 May 2025 were confirmed as a correct record and signed by the Chair.

Items of other business notified under Council Procedure Rule 30 to be announced, together with the special circumstances that justify their consideration as a matter of urgency. The Chair to rule on the admission of such items.

There were no items of urgent business.

To receive any declarations of interest.

Councillor Reena Ranger declared a non-pecuniary interest in agenda item 5 (24/0532/FUL: Overbury, Woodside Walk, Northwood).  Councillor Ranger stated that she would leave the room whilst the application was considered and would not participate in the debate or vote.

Demolition of existing buildings; subdivision of site and construction of two self-build two-storey detached dwellings with accommodation in the roofspace served by front/rear dormers and side rooflights; with associated access, parking and landscaping works, at Overbury, Woodside Walk, Northwood.

Recommendation: that subject to no new material considerations being raised, planning permission be granted subject to conditions.

Councillor Ranger left the meeting room.

The application was for demolition of existing buildings; subdivision of site and construction of two self-build two-storey detached dwellings with accommodation in the roofspace served by front/rear dormers and side rooflights; with associated access, parking and landscaping works, at Overbury, Woodside Walk, Northwood.

The Planning Officer reported that since publication of the agenda three letters of support had been received, all of which were from people who had not previously made a representation on the application. 

The Committee received a presentation showing the differences between the amended application which was before the committee, and a previous application which had been refused and had been subject to appeal in 2020.  The presentation also included floor plans and roof plans and the wider aerial context for the amended application.

A member of the public spoke against the application.

The agent spoke in favour of the application.

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

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

·         For the reasons set out in the report, and by virtue of the separation distances between the proposed dwellings and the boundary with Dell Lodge, officers considered that the previous concerns about overlooking had been addressed (or would be addressed by planning conditions).  It was not considered by officers that there would be any demonstrable harm arising from the amended application in relation to overlooking or loss of light: the impact of the development on neighbouring properties had not been upheld by the Planning Inspector in  the appeal decision.  In respect of protected trees, the application, by virtue of the re-sizing and re-siting of the proposed buildings, resulted in a reduction in the loss of trees compared with the appealed application, and allowed for greater space for those trees being retained and for newly planted trees to grow and develop.  Officers also considered that the amended application would preserve the character and appearance of Woodside Walk, overcoming the concern identified in the appeal decision.

·         Although the existing property on the site was an Arts and Crafts style house dating to c1900 it was neither nationally nor locally listed, and there had not been any assessment as to whether its listing was possible or desirable.  No concern in respect of harm to a heritage asset had been identified in the appeal decision. 

·         Whilst acknowledging that the proposal represented an improvement on the previous scheme, several Committee Members remained concerned about the loss of trees and the maturity and siting of the proposed replacements, noting that trees planted close to boundaries can cause issues to neighbouring properties.  Officers responded that a landscape plan had been conditioned (Condition 6), which required details of landscaping to be provided in accordance with the Proposed Landscape Plan.  However, the wording of Condition 6 could be amended if considered necessary by Members, to require a new landscape plan to be provided.  Once submitted,  ...  view the full minutes text for item PC5/25

Construction of warehouse units (Use Classes E(g)(iii), B2 and B8) including access and servicing arrangements, car parking, landscaping and associated works at Maple Cross House, Denham Way and Kier Offices off Maple Lodge Close, Maple Cross.

Recommendation: that following the completion of a S106 agreement to secure financial contributions toward biodiversity monitoring, travel plan monitoring and sustainable transport improvements, planning permission be granted subject to conditions.

The application was for construction of warehouse units (Use Classes E(g)(iii), B2 and B8) including access and servicing arrangements, car parking, landscaping and associated works at Maple Cross House, Denham Way and Kier Offices off Maple Lodge Close, Maple Cross.

The Planning Officer reported that since the agenda had been published, an updated Landscape Masterplan drawing and site plan had been received.  These provided further detail on the tree planting (which was also contained on another drawing).  Reference to plan/drawing numbers in conditions 2 and 21 therefore required updating to reflect the revision.  Condition 39 also required updating to reference a later revision of the landscape maintenance strategy document, which had been updated to provide clarity on the provision of replacement planting should any of the existing boundary trees fail.  The Planning Officer also reported that officers would like to add an informative note to any approval to remind the applicant of the acceptable hours for noisy construction works in Three Rivers i.e. 8am to 6pm Monday to Friday, 9am to 1pm on Saturday: this was a standard informative for most planning permissions.  Finally, the Planning Officer also reported that the applicant had provided further clarification on noise levels around the site and the predicted operational noise, and on this basis had requested that the hours for deliveries and collections at units 5 and 6 be amended to allow a 6am start on Monday to Friday.  This request had been reviewed by the Environmental Health Officer (EHO), who had not been able to agree the 6am start time.  However, the EHO had commented that based on the information provided, they considered that condition 36 could be amended to allow collections and deliveries from 7am on Saturdays and from 8am to 11pm on Sundays.  If Members considered this acceptable, condition 36 could be updated on this basis.

The Planning Committee noted that the application was a major development which proposed the redevelopment of the entire site to provide 6 warehouse units within 2 buildings (one containing 4 units (units 1-4), and the other 2 units (units 5 and 6)).   The Planning Officer clarified that condition 36 which restricted the hours of use, applied only to units 5 and 6.  This was due to concerns about the potential noise and disturbance to neighbouring residents from loading and unloading of vehicles to those units.  Restriction on the hours for collections and deliveries were not proposed for the other units as the buildings themselves were considered to provide noise mitigation due to their location between the residential dwellings at Franklins and the loading bays and the attenuation provided by the construction quality, which would be to BREEAM standards.  Access to the site would be solely from Denham Way; the access from Maple Lodge Close would be conditioned to only be used in connection with maintenance of the grounds.  A 6m high timber acoustic barrier was proposed along the bottom boundary of the site to mitigate noise from units 5 and 6; this would be  ...  view the full minutes text for item PC6/25

Change of use from builder’s merchant (Sui Generis) to Class B8 (Storage and Distribution) use with ancillary trade counter at Units A & B, Valley Park, Olds Approach, Rickmansworth.

Recommendation: that planning permission be granted.

The application was for change of use from builder’s merchant (Sui Generis) to Class B8 (Storage and Distribution) use with ancillary trade counter at Units A & B, Valley Park, Olds Approach, Rickmansworth.

The Planning Officer reported that since publication of the agenda, the Environmental Health Officer had provided their comments and it was proposed to update Condition 5 as follows:

“The level of noise emitted from the site as a result of the development hereby permitted, including all noise associated with deliveries and vehicle movements including parking within the car parking areas and service yards, shall not exceed 30 LAeq between the hours of 18:00 to 07:30 Monday to Friday inclusive and 13:00 on Saturdays to 07:30 the following working day as measured by the relevant person instructed by the Local Planning Authority using a suitably calibrated and certified device 1m from the façade of any residential property in Moor Lane Crossing.”

Councillor Diana Barber of Batchworth Community Council spoke on 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:

·        The proposal included 24/7 operations for a limited number of deliveries.  Officers were of the view that, given the location of the site, the proposed use on that basis was acceptable, and that on the basis of the submitted and revised noise impact assessment the impact both in terms of the transport and noise was acceptable.

·        The site was located in Moor Park and Eastbury (not Rickmansworth Town).

·        Committee Members expressed the view that a small part of the site which was located closest to housing should not be subject to 24/7 use, in order to avoid disturbance to residents.  Officers responded that a Car Parking Management Plan could be conditioned, requiring that part of the site to be closed off during night-time hours.   Committee Members agreed that this condition should be added.

Councillor Whately-Smith moved, and Councillor Cooper seconded, that the application be approved subject to conditions, amendment to Condition 5 as outlined above, and addition of a further condition requiring a Car Parking Management Plan to be submitted.  On being put to the vote this was agreed, the voting being 9 for, 0 against, 2 abstentions.

RESOLVED: that the application be approved subject to conditions, amendment to Condition 5 as outlined above, and addition of a further condition requiring a Car Parking Management Plan to be submitted.