Agenda and minutes

Apologies were received from Councillor Ian Morris, Councillor Debbie Morris and Councillor Stephen King. Substitutes being Councillor Andrea Fraser, Councillor Rue Grewal and Councillor Stephen Cox.

To receive the minutes from the Planning Committee meeting held on 22 June 2023 for the Chair to sign following agreement of the minutes at the meeting on 13 July 2023. 

To confirm as a correct record the minutes from the Planning Committee meeting held on 13 July 2023.

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

The minutes of the Planning Committee meeting held on 13 July were confirmed as a correct record and signed by the Chair of the meeting.

To receive any declarations of interest.

Where a member of this Planning Committee is also a member of a Parish Council they are entitled to take part in any debate at this Committee on an application within that Parish area provided that the Councillor

·          has an open mind about the application

·          is not bound by the views of the Parish Planning Committee and

·          can deal with the application fairly and on its merits at Committee

There were no declarations of interest.

The Chair read out the following statement to the Committee:

All fellow Councillors should come to the Committee meeting with an open mind and be able to demonstrate that they have not pre-determined our decision in any way.  We must only reach a decision after consideration of all the information provided by the officers, applicants, members of the public and other Councillors and the planning policies of the Council, and should not do anything which may lead others to believe that we have already made up our minds as to whether to approve or refuse an application.

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 other business.

Members will be aware that an application was refused by the Committee for the raised patio and proposed privacy screens a few months ago. An enforcement notice has subsequently been served and the Council is in receipt of a planning appeal and enforcement appeal, with the owner appealing ground (a) only, that planning permission should be granted for what has been built.

This application follows a previously approved planning permission permitted in 2021. This application proposes the same form of development except for a number of fenestration changes which the officer ran through. The application site does not include the raised patio area, this is subject to the on-going appeals.

With regards to the report, there is an error at paragraph 4.1.1 as Batchworth Parish Council are referred to as having no objection to the scheme. This is incorrect, they object to the application, specifically in respect of the amended first floor rear windows and state that they should be reverted to the approved form, which includes the removal of the proposed Juliet balcony serving bedroom 2.

With regard to the most recent approved scheme, under reference 21/2425/FUL (the extant scheme), the differences between that approved scheme and the current application are in relation to fenestration changes only and are as follows:

• The first floor window in the front elevation of the house, above the garage has been slightly realigned.
• The previously approved door on the ground floor rear has been altered to a clear glazed, fixed-shut window.

·        Ground floor rear glazing altered with the additional of two further full-length glazed windows forming bi-fold doors

·        First floor rear glazing amended over garage to include a full length window, the addition of a Juliet balcony to an existing approved window with alterations to its design.

In accordance with Council Procedure Rule 35(B) a member of the public spoke on behalf of the neighbours of the applicant, against the application, emphasising the primary issues on injury to privacy and the potential use of the flat roof as a balcony in future.

In accordance with Council Procedure Rule 35(A) a District Councillor spoke against the application emphasising concerns over the possibility for the garage utility, currently a non-habitable space, to be converted into a habitable space such as a den, by the applicant in future, which would not require a planning permission.

In accordance with Council Procedure Rule 35(A) a Parish Councillor spoke on behalf of Batchworth Community Council against the application reiterating that they have objected to numerous issues which have been submitted by the applicant since 2021, and will continue to object to the remaining unresolved points.

The Planning Officer outlined the key issues:

Ø  Installation of the balustrade and the potential to use the flat roof at first floor level.

·        With regards to the flat roof; there is a condition attached to the report that does restrict the use. If it is found that the flat roof is being used for amenity purposes, the Council has the ability to issue  ...  view the full minutes text for item PC28/23

The Planning Officer advised that there was no update on this application.

Members raised the following points:

The sign is very large; 8.6 meters long, and although it is not going to be illuminated, with very bright colours, it is going to be obtrusive. However, it should be noted that local children participated in the design of the sign, and it would mark out the building in a nice contrast.

The officer clarified that the Committee is to consider for approval this particular sign in this particular location.

Members also raised a point that the officer report did not specify that at no point in the future will this sign be lit. The Planning Officer clarified that a separate permission will be needed for the sign to be illuminated.

Councillor Stephen Cox moved, seconded by Councillor Chris Lloyd that ADVERTISEMENT CONSENT BE GRANTED subject to the standard advertisement conditions as outlined in the officer report.

On being put to the Committee the motion was declared CARRIED by the Chair, the voting being by general assent.

RESOLVED:

That ADVERTISEMENT CONSENT BE GRANTED subject to the conditions set out in the officer report.

Recommendation: That Planning Permission be Granted

The Planning Officer advised that there was an update to Paragraph 3.5, second bullet point of the report:

·        The proposed rear dormer has a depth of 3.5m, height of 2.5m and width of 6.7m, and is therefore larger than the rear dormer which formed part of the dismissed scheme (which had a depth of 3.5m, height of 2.8m and width of 8.1m).

This is incorrect; it is smaller than the rear dormer which formed part of the dismissed scheme.

In accordance with Council Procedure Rule 35(B) a member of the public spoke in support of the application, reiterating that the Planning Officer had confirmed; the proposed rear dormer, as amended, would not result in any overbearing impact to any neighbouring properties in terms of loss of light or overbearing impact, and it would not pose any demonstratable harm to the host dwelling or wider street scene. The member of the public emphasised the importance of being able to work from home, and that this application seeks to accommodate a home office space for this reason.

In accordance with Council Procedure Rule 35(A) a Parish Councillor spoke on behalf of Croxley Green Parish Council against the application, summarising the application history of the developer and stating that the Parish Council objects to the significant increase in size of the rear dormer. The Parish Councillor emphasised that the planning inspector had commented that the proposed development by virtue of the size and dominating scale of the proposed rear dormer will adversely affect the character and appearance of the host dwelling as well as the street scene, and would fail to accord with the policies. The Planning Officers’ report expresses a contrary view in section 7.2 before coming to the recommendation that planning permission should be granted. Croxley Green Parish Council believe that the current report has come to the wrong conclusion as there have been no material changes in planning policy or law since the original refusal.

The Officer also clarified that the current scheme is different, and the report sets out why it is different and why the Officers’ conclusion is therefore different to that of the inspector’s, and to confirm that there has not been any enforcement action on this site.

Members raised the following points:

The new scheme is significantly different than what had been dismissed by the planning inspector and more in line with the requirements.

Councillor Philip Hearn moved, seconded by Councillor Matthew Bedford that subject to no new material planning considerations being raised, that PLANNING PERMISSION BE GRANTED subject to the conditions outlined in the officer report.

On being put to the Committee the motion was declared CARRIED by the Chair, the voting being 10 For, 1 Against and 0 Abstention.

RESOLVED:

That, subject to no new material planning considerations being raised, that PLANNING PERMISSION BE GRANTED subject to the conditions outlined in the officer report.

           If the Committee wishes to consider the remaining item in private, it will be appropriate for a resolution to be passed in the following terms:-

            “that under Section 100A of the Local Government Act 1972 the press and public be excluded from the meeting for the following item of business on the grounds that it involves the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined under paragraphs 1 to 7 of Part I of Schedule 12A to the Act. It has been decided by the Council that in all the circumstances, the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information.”

            (Note:  If other confidential business is approved under item 3, it will also be necessary to specify the class of exempt or confidential information in the additional items.)

The Chair moved, duly seconded, the following motion:

“that under Section 100A of the Local Government Act 1972 the press and public be excluded from the meeting for the following items of business on the grounds that it involves the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined under paragraphs 1 and 7 of Part I of Schedule 12A to the Act. It has been decided by the Council that in all the circumstances, the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information.”

On being put to the Committee the motion was declared CARRIED by the Chair the voting being by general assent.

RESOLVED:

To move into Part ii business.

To take direct action against a property in the District which has failed to comply with a Section 215 Notice.

The Committee received a report seeking agreement to exercise powers under Section 219 Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to be able to carry out the works as required by the Council’s Section 215 Notice dated 1 September 2022 with regard to property in Watford Rural Parish.  Members were advised of the situation at the property and reason behind the request to take action.

Officers were seeking authority to be given to the Head of Regulatory Services to exercise powers under Section 219 of the Town and Country Planning Act to enter the land and carry out works as required by the Section 215 Notice and recover the expenses reasonably incurred, in respect of a property in Watford Rural Parish.

By way of a brief background, following reports to the Council from local residents regarding the poor condition of the property, the Council attempted to liaise with the owner to avoid the service of a section 215 notice, otherwise known as an untidy land notice. Unfortunately, despite best efforts, the owner has not wished to engage with the Council which led to the service of a section 215 notice in September 2022 which was not complied with. For reasons set out within the report it is considered that direct action is the best route to pursue.

Members asked what support had been provided to the occupier.  It was advised that assistance had been offered by officers, local charities and other community organisations.  The occupier had not engaged with anyone throughout the various forms of communication and when the notice was served at the property.  Officers had liaised with the Police, Community Safety Team and Safeguarding Officers to try and establish contact throughout the process to try and make contact with the occupier.

It was for the committee to decide if action was to be taken.

Councillor Stephen Cox moved, seconded by Councillor Rue Grewal, the recommendation to exercise powers under Section 219 Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to be able to carry out the works as required by the Council’s Section 215 Notice dated 1 September 2022 with regard to property in Watford Rural Parish. 

On being put to the Committee the motion was declared CARRIED by the Chair the voting being by general assent.

RESOLVED:

That authority be given to the Head of Regulatory Services to exercise powers under Section 219 Town and Country Planning Act 1990 in respect of land and property in the Watford Rural Parish to enter the land and carry out the works referred to in paragraph 4.1 as required by the Council’s Section 215 Notice dated 1 September 2022 (served 7 September 2022) and to recover the expenses reasonably incurred in so doing from the landowner.

That public access to the report and appendices is denied until after the Planning Committee meeting (subject to redaction of personal data).

That public access to the decision be immediate after the Planning Committee meeting (subject to redaction of personal data).

CHAIR