Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Andrea Fraser, substitute being Councillor Reena Ranger.

Apologies for absence were also received from Councillor Ruth Clark and Councillor Steve Drury.

The minutes of the Planning Committee held on 19 October were confirmed as a correct record and signed by the Chair of the meeting.

The minutes of the Planning Committee held on 16 November were also confirmed as a correct record and signed by the Chair of the meeting.

To receive any declarations of interest.

Councillor Debbie Morris declared a non-pecuniary interest in Item 9: Planning Application 23/1694/FUL: SANTOSH HOUSE, 6 PEMBROKE ROAD, MOOR PARK, NORTHWOOD, HERTFORDSHIRE, HA6 2HR and left the meeting during consideration of the item.

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. However, an update on a change to a standard informative was provided by Adam Ralton, Development Management Team Leader. For any applications that are granted planning permission, as a standard procedure, officers put an informative, which is a notice on the decision. It contains helpful information to the applicant. One of those is if there are conditions that need to be discharged, an application will need to be submitted and the relevant fees paid. The planning fee regulations have been changed by central government; the fees have gone up, and the fees on the informatives will need to be updated. For any applications that are approved tonight, the fees at the beginning of the first informative will be different than what is included in the papers.

Demolition of existing garages and construction of 7no. new dwellings (use class C3) in the form of bungalows with roof accommodation; new building to provide a laundry and maintenance store; and conversion of an existing garage to serve as a maintenance store and associated parking.

Recommendation: That subject to the recommendation of approval and/or no objection from the Lead Local Flood Authority (LLFA) and the completion of a Section 106 Agreement (securing an affordable housing monetary contribution), that the decision be delegated to the Head of Regulatory Services to GRANT PLANNING PERMISSION subject to the conditions set out below, and any conditions requested by the LLFA

Application 23/1128/FUL – was for demolition of existing garages and construction of 7no. new dwellings (use class C3) in the form of bungalows with roof accommodation; new building to provide a laundry and maintenance store; and conversion of an existing garage to serve as a maintenance store and associated parking.

Tom Norris, Planning Officer provided an update on the application; there is an agreed draft Section 106 ready for execution, and Hertfordshire Highways have confirmed no objection to the application since the publication of the committee report.

The Applicant spoke in support of the application, and a representative from Cedars Village residents’ association, a representative from Chorleywood Parish Council, and a District Councillor spoke against the application.

The Planning Officer proceeded to recap the reasons for previous refusal of the application.

Parking was one of the reasons for previous refusal, however, Officers are satisfied by the information provided that parking can be accommodated within the site.

Drainage and flooding were another reason for refusal. The Applicant has since provided additional information to the LLFA, which is currently under review.

The Planning Officer further advised that the Landscape Officer had not raised an objection and welcomes the retention of T61 Horse Chestnut tree. The trees that are recommended for removal are of low quality and are in a more discreet location within the site.

The final reason for previous refusal was the absence of agreement under Section 106, which has since been agreed in principle and ready to be signed.

Members of the Committee raised concerns regarding the potential additional distance residents may need to walk to access parking on site, and how the large Horse Chestnut tree would be preserved.

The Committee was informed by the Planning Officer that parking allocation across the site would be managed privately. Parking provision is sold separately to the residents, which means if they have a car parking space with their residence it should be available to them at all times. Officers would not know specific distances that residents would have to walk between their homes and their cars. The general provision for parking can be accommodated within the current site based on the information provided.

In response to the question raised regarding the preservation of the Horse Chestnut tree, the Planning Officer confirmed that tree protection had been proposed for this tree, and further enhancements to the rooting environment are also proposed.

It was noted that there has been no response from the LLFA.

Further concerns were raised by the Committee on parking; even if residents can buy a parking space with their property, there is no evidence to suggest that there will be sufficient parking available to them.

In response to this, Claire Westwood, Development Management Team Leader advised that, although the recommendation is subject to the consideration of any comments from the LLFA, Member can still determine the application, notwithstanding the fact that the LLFA have not submitted their final comments at this time.

In addition, it was suggested that Members  ...  view the full minutes text for item PC30/23

Construction of new building for vehicle repair.

Recommendation: That Planning Permission be Granted.

Application 23/1560/FUL – proposes the construction of an additional building within the site, to be used for vehicle repair.

Adam Ralton, Development Management Team Leader advised that there was no update to the application.

A request for an informative has been made to recommend regular testing of the quality of water near the site to ensure that there is no contamination of the water in the future.

The Committee was informed that the issue of remediating the existing known contamination is being dealt with the application for the redevelopment of the site, therefore any existing contamination is covered. The drainage system that was proposed as part of the previous application is designed to prevent any future contamination; whereby the water gets treated through fuel interceptors to stop any possible contamination.

It was further clarified that the Canal and River Trust had made a comment regarding the requested condition on their concerns of the existing contamination; but their concerns relate to the existing contamination that was identified and is being remediated as part of the previous application. Officer had been in contact with the Canal and River Trust and provided background information that the Trust may not have been aware of, and this is the reason why there is no condition requiring contamination investigations to happen unless anything is discovered at the time this particular development is implemented.

The Officer recommendation to grant the planning permission, subject to the conditions set out in the report, was proposed by Councillor Matthew Bedford, seconded by Councillor Stephen King, put to the vote and carried unanimously.

RESOLVED:

That PLANNING PERMISSION BE GRANTED subject to the conditions and Informatives set out in the committee report.

Construction of single-storey side infill extension and single-storey rear extension.

Recommendation: That Planning Permission be granted

Application 23/1662/FUL - Construction of single storey side and rear extensions.

Tom Norris, Planning Officer advised that there was no update to this application.

In response to a question from a Member of the Committee, the Planning Officer advised that the difference between this application and the previous application is that this application does not propose any roof extension, and therefore Officers consider that the Green Belt reason for the previous refusal has been satisfactorily overcome.

A Member of the Committee requested an amendment to Condition 3 (C3); that samples should be provided for the materials to be used in the work to ensure that they match those of the existing building. The Planning Officer confirmed that C3 can be amended to reflect this.

The Officer recommendation to grant planning permission, subject to the conditions set out in the report, with the proposed amendment to C3 was moved by Councillor Stephen King, seconded by Councillor Matthew Bedford, put to the vote and carried unanimously. 

RESOLVED:

That PLANNING PERMISSION BE GRANTED subject to the following amended condition:

C3       Before any building operations above ground level hereby permitted are commenced, samples and details of the proposed external materials shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and no external materials shall be used other than those approved..Reason: In the interests of the visual amenity of the area in accordance with Policies CP1 and CP12 of the Core Strategy (adopted October 2011) and Policies DM1, DM3 and Appendix 2 of the Development Management Policies LDD (adopted July 2013).

Demolition of existing dwelling and construction of two storey detached dwelling with accommodation in the roof space, served by front/rear rooflights; provision of rear terrace balcony and associated works.

Recommendation: That Planning Permission be granted.

Application 23/1665/FUL – Demolition of existing dwelling and construction of two storey detached dwelling with accommodation in the roof space, served by front/rear rooflights; provision of rear terrace balcony and associated works.

Tom Norris, Planning Officer reported that there is one update to the application; a minor amendment to the wording of Condition 4 (C4) which would require the ecological enhancement measures to be in accordance with the preliminary Bat Roost Assessment as well as the details set out in Dusk Emergence Bat Survey.

A representative from the Parish Council spoke against the application outlining the climate impact that will result from demolishing the existing dwelling, the loss of the bungalow being replaced by a multi-floor property not suitable for downsizing of older residents of the area or for disabled residents. The representative also pointed out that this proposal to demolish a serviceable existing property, which already has permission for an additional single storey under Permitted Development Rights, is directly opposed to the requirement of the NPPF in Paragraph 152.

The Planning Officer acknowledged the concerns around the sustainability aspect of demolishing the house and advised that the Council has no policy bases to refuse the application on grounds of climate impact that would result from the demolition of the house.

The Officer confirmed that the proposed dwelling would remain accessible with ground floor living accommodation that would be suitable for the elderly and less able people, and clarified that Officers consider the Permitted Development scheme a viable fallback that the applicant would implement, should planning permission be refused for the current application.

Concerns around the proposed dwelling being out of keeping with the character of the area were noted.

It was also noted that the permitted development was already very close to that of the proposed development; therefore, refusal of the application would be difficult to defend.

The Officer recommendation to grant planning permission, with a minor amendment to the wording of Condition 4 (C4), and subject to the conditions set out in the report, was moved by Councillor Matthew Bedford, seconded by Councillor Khalid Hussain. 

Councillor Debbie Morris moved a counter proposal for refusal on the grounds of the adverse impact on the character of the area and the street scene. Councillor Philip Hearn seconded the motion and pointed out that the proposal is in breach of Policy 4.1 of the Chorleywood Neighbourhood Development Plan (NDP) relating to the replacement of the bungalow with a two-storey dwelling not suitable for downsizing of older residents of the area or for disabled residents.

The Chair pointed out that it’s unlikely that this reason will be sufficient for refusal.

Claire Westwood, Development Management Team Leader advised that if the reason is the impact on the character of the area and street scene it needs to be identified what it is that is causing the harm.

It was clarified by the Planning Officer that there is upstairs accommodation in the permitted development property but not in the existing property, and downstairs accommodation  ...  view the full minutes text for item PC33/23

Demolition of existing conservatory and construction of single storey side and rear extensions, first floor side extension, loft extension including alterations to the roof, rear dormer window and rear rooflights, new entrance door, internal alterations and alterations to fenestration detail.

Recommendation: That Planning Permission be granted.

Application 23/1694/FUL – Demolition of existing conservatory and construction of single storey side and rear extensions, first floor side extension, loft extension including alterations to the roof, rear dormer window and rear rooflights, new entrance door, internal alterations and alterations to fenestration detail.

Councillor Debbie Morris declared a non-pecuniary interest in the application and withdrew from the meeting whilst the item was considered.

Claire Westwood, Development Management Team Leader advised that there was no update to the application since publication of the agenda.

The Applicant spoke in support of the proposal, describing the difficulties with damp issues and two major leaks linked to the flat roofs.

In response to a question the Development Management Team Leader confirmed that the previously proposed green roof has been amended during the course of the application; there is no further proposal to use the flat roof as a balcony or terrace, and there are no doors exiting out onto the roof. Furthermore, there is a suggested condition; Condition 8 (C8) which states that the roof is only to be used for essential maintenance or repair, or escape, in case of emergency. In addition; the Officer confirmed that the chimneys are to be retained externally, with Condition 3 (C3) which states that no demolition or works to the roof shall commence on site whatsoever until a Construction & Demolition Method Statement has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. 

A Member of the Committee has asked if it would be reasonable to have the Permitted Development Rights removed for outbuildings and extensions. The Officer explained that the existing property exceeds the plot coverage with a slight increase from 15% to 23%, however, Officers overall think that the proposed changes will be beneficial.

The Officer confirmed that the removal of the Permitted Development Rights would not be unreasonable if the Committee agreed, however it would be specific in relation to Class E, which is the outbuildings class only. It would not prevent the home owner to erect an outbuilding or shed in future; it would mean they would need to submit a planning application which would be considered on its merits at that time. The Officer reconfirmed that the removal of the Permitted Development Rights should be limited to Class E.

The Officer recommendation to grant the planning application, with the additional condition of removing the Permitted Development Rights under Class E of Part 1 (outbuildings), and subject to the conditions set out in the report, was proposed by Councillor Philip Hearn, seconded by Councillor Reena Ranger, put to the vote and carried unanimously.

RESOLVED:

That PLANNING PERMISSION BE GRANTED subject to the following amended condition:

C9       Immediately following the implementation of this permission, notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 2015 (or any other revoking and re-enacting that order with or without modification) no development within the following Classes of Schedule 2 of the Order shall take place.

Part 1

Class E - provision of  ...  view the full minutes text for item PC34/23

Change of use from single dwellinghouse to childrens care home.

Recommendation: That Planning Permission be refused.

Application 23/1707/FUL – Change of use from single dwellinghouse to children’s care home.

Adam Ralton, Development Management Team Leader advised that there was no update on the application.

The Applicant spoke in support of the proposal, a representative of the residents, a representative of Chorleywood Parish Council, and a District Councillor spoke against the proposal.

Adam Ralton, Development Management Team Leader responded to the concerns and confirmed that the majority of the concerns raised; such as the disturbance and noise have been addressed in the report.

The Officer recommendation to refuse the planning application, subject to the reasons set out in the report, was proposed by Councillor Chris Lloyd, seconded by Councillor Stephen King, put to the vote and carried unanimously.

In response to a question raised by a Member of the Committee, the Officer clarified that the recommendation is based on the proposal that is currently being considered, it is not for a broad C2 use, it is for the specific C2 use that is proposed. If Officers were to grant planning permission for this use in the event of an appeal, the Officers would look to request planning conditions restrict the use.

RESOLVED:

That PLANNING PERMISSION BE REFUSED for the reasons set out in the committee report.

Replacement of doors and windows.

Recommendation: That planning permission be granted.

Application 23/1767/FUL - Replacement of doors and windows.

Officers advised that there was no update on this application.

The Officer recommendation to grant the planning application, subject to the conditions set out in the report, was proposed by Councillor Chris Lloyd, seconded by Councillor Debbie Morris, put to the vote and carried unanimously.

RESOLVED:

That subject to no new material considerations being raised PLANNING PERMISSION BE GRANTED, subject to the conditions and Informatives set out in the committee report.

Variation of Condition 11 (Off Site Highway Improvement) of planning permission 20/1881/FUL to allow phased delivery of the off site highways works.

Recommendation: That condition 11 (Off Site Highway Improvement) be VARIED and that PLANNING PERMISSION IS GRANTED.

Application 23/1798/FUL - Variation of Condition 11 (Off-Site Highway Improvement) of planning permission 20/1881/FUL to allow phased delivery of the off-site highways works at Land North Of Little Green Lane, Killingdown Farm, Little Green Lane, Croxley Green, Hertfordshire.

Claire Westwood, Development Management Team Leader reported that there was an update on the application; email communication was received today from Croxley Green Parish Council to apologise for not being able to attend the meeting tonight, due to clashing meetings, and advised that Croxley Green Parish Council would like to re-affirm the comments submitted to TRDC, and would have made representation if possible.

The Officer explained the background of the application; when the application 20/1881/FUL was initially considered, Hertfordshire County Council Highways Authority requested a number of conditions, included Condition 11 (C11). Whilst the application was refused, it wasn’t refused on highways grounds, at the appeal, as standard practice for the local authority to submit suggested conditions to the inspector. Those conditions submitted included recommended conditions from consultees; such as C11, that was attached by the inspector on the decision when the appeal was allowed. The current application seeks to vary C11 to allow a maximum of 25 dwellings to be occupied, prior to the completion of the highways works. The Highways Authority have reviewed the application and considered that it is acceptable.

A District Councillor spoke against the application on behalf of the residents, outlining their concerns regarding any of the dwellings being occupied before the full S278 works are completed. The Councillor requested if the Committee could consider 5% of the dwellings to be occupied; which would be 8 dwellings, instead of 25 dwellings.

The Officer explained that when the application was initially submitted; the Applicant asked for 50 dwellings to be allowed to be occupied, and the Highways Authority raised no objection to that. The Applicant subsequently requested the number of dwellings to be occupied to be reduced to 25, which was also approved by the Highways Authority.

Members raised concerns around the safety of people walking on site with lorries driving past, and the possibility of more near misses and accidents.

The Officer responded by pointing out that there is a separate construction access to the south of the site, therefore, lorries will not be using the access to the north of the site which will be potentially serving the dwellings to be occupied.

The Officer recommendation that Condition 11 (Off Site Highway Improvement) be varied with an amendment to allow only 8 dwellings to be occupied instead of 25 dwellings, and to grant planning permission, subject to the conditions set out in the report, was moved by Councillor Sara Bedford, seconded by Councillor Chris Lloyd, put to the vote and carried.

The voting in respect of the recommendation was: For 7, Against 0, Abstain 2.

RESOLVED:

That Condition 11 (Off Site Highway Improvement) be VARIED, with the following amendment; to allow only 8 dwellings to be occupied instead of 25 dwellings and that PLANNING PERMISSION IS GRANTED.  ...  view the full minutes text for item PC37/23

None.