Agenda and draft minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Stephen King and Chris Mitchell.

Councillor Narinder Sian substituted for Councillor Chris Mitchell.

To confirm as a correct record the minutes of the Planning Committee meeting held on 12 September 2024.

The minutes of the meeting held on 12 September 2024 were confirmed as a correct record and signed by the Chair.

To receive any declarations of interest.

The Liberal Democrat Group declared a non-pecuniary interest in applications 24/1161/FUL, 24/1316/FUL and 24/1317/LBC as the architect is a member of the authority and a member of the Liberal Democrat Group.

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.

Construction of single storey side extension; internal alterations; alterations to fenestration; replacement windows; and alterations to external materials to existing sports pavilion, installation of air source heat pump, alterations to hardstanding and associated landscaping.

Recommendation: That the decision be delegated to the Head of Regulatory Services to consider any representations received and grant Planning Permission subject to conditions.

The application was for construction of a single-storey side extension; internal alterations; alterations to fenestration; replacement windows; alterations to external materials to existing sports pavilion; installation of air source heat pump; and alterations to hardstanding and associated landscaping at Chorleywood Youth Football Club, Chorleywood House Estate, Rickmansworth Road, Chorleywood.

The application was before the Committee as Three Rivers District Council was the owner of the application site.

The Planning Officer advised that there was no update.

The Committee noted the site plans, and that the application comprised an extension to the existing building in order to be able to upgrade existing facilities which would remain the same, but with a reorganised layout.

Councillor Chris Lloyd moved, and Councillor Philip Hearn seconded, that the decision be delegated to the Head of Regulatory Services to consider any representations received and grant planning permission subject to conditions.   On being put to the vote this was carried unanimously.

RESOLVED: that the decision be delegated to the Head of Regulatory Services to consider any representations received and grant planning permission subject to conditions.

Retrospective temporary change of use of land to construct access track for construction vehicles to facilitate developments at Bullsland Farm (for a further 2 years).

Recommendation: That Planning Permission be granted for a temporary period (2 years).

The application was for a retrospective temporary change of use of land to construct an access track for construction vehicles to facilitate developments at Bullsland Farm, Bullsland Lane, Chorleywood for a further two years.

The application had been called in by Chorleywood Parish Council due to concerns regarding the access no longer being temporary if an additional three years were granted, and Green Belt concerns.

The Planning Officer reported Condition 2 was to be updated to require all soft landscaping works approved by the condition to be carried out before the end of the first planting and seeding season following the restoration works, and to remove reference to first occupation of any part of the buildings.

Should permission be granted, the date referred to at Condition 3 would also need to be amended to refer to a date 2 years in advance of the date on which the temporary grant of planning permission was given.

Parish Councillor Jon Bishop of Chorleywood Parish Council spoke against the application.

Martin Crook, agent, spoke in favour of the application.

A Committee Member commented that he considered that the extension request was reasonable, with the applicant only having been granted one year’s temporary approval when the application had been considered by the Committee previously.

Another Committee Member raised concern about the potential for the applicant to continue to seek further extensions.

In response to questions and comments the Planning Officer commented that whilst temporary permission for two years had been refused previously, further information had been submitted and considered which had altered the view of the Planning Officer.  This was set out in the report and had included consideration of highway safety, and the fact that the land would be able to be fully remediated afterwards which tempered the harm to the Green Belt and the character of the area.

Committee Members also discussed the amount of time which would be needed to restore the land, noting that this could take at least a year depending on weather conditions, and that newly planted vegetation sometimes failed to establish.  The Committee considered that Conditions C2 and C3 should be amended to reflect the required timescale for restoration of the land, with revised wording to be circulated to Committee Members for agreement. 

Note: the wording subsequently circulated is shown below:

Condition 2: Soft landscaping

Prior to the expiration of the two-year temporary period as set out within Condition 3, a soft landscaping scheme specifying the re-seeding of the land and proposed enhancement planting within the site, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

All soft landscaping works approved by this condition shall be carried out before the end of the first planting and seeding season immediately following the completion of the restoration works secured by Condition 3.

Notwithstanding the management of the land as set out within the Grassland Restoration Plan, following the removal of the temporary haul road if any of the proposed soft landscaping, are removed, die,  ...  view the full minutes text for item PC72/23

Part retrospective: works to rear gardens of Plots 1 and 2 including land levelling, external patio, retaining walls, external seating areas and fencing.

Recommendation: That part retrospective planning permission be granted.

The application was for part retrospective permission for works to rear gardens of Plots 1 and 2 including land levelling, external patio, retaining walls, external seating areas and fencing at Vivikt, Chorleywood Road, Rickmansworth.

The application was before the Committee as it had been called in by Chorleywood Parish Council due to insufficient information on the proposed development and concerns regarding the impact of the development on surrounding neighbouring properties.

The Planning Officer reported that the plan numbers in condition 1 and condition 4 required updating to reflect the correct plan numbers as E118 REV C and E1120.

Parish Councillor Jon Bishop of Chorleywood Parish Council spoke on the application and reported that the Parish Council had subsequently withdrawn its call in following the submission of new plans and confirmation that the existing enforcement case would not be closed until the application was fully enacted.

Terence Horner, a local resident, spoke against the application.

The Planning Officer commented that prior to the meeting, some discrepancies on the plan had been noted by residents which had related to land levels, with the plans not having taken account of the changes to land levels resulting from spoil remaining on the site.  The plans also did not include spot levels relating to existing topography.  It was therefore suggested that the application be deferred in order to obtain clarification in relation to existing levels and existing spot heights so comparisons could be made between plans.

The Chair moved, and Councillor Lloyd seconded, that the application be deferred to seek clarification on existing and proposed land levels and this was agreed unanimously.

RESOLVED: that the application be deferred to seek clarification on existing and proposed land levels.

Change of use of land to residential use in association with Fortunes Farm including extension and conversion of existing stable block to home office and gym.

Recommendation: That planning permission be granted.

The application was for change of use of land to residential use in association with Fortunes Farm including extension and conversion of existing stable block to home office and gym at Fortunes Farmhouse, High Elms Lane, Abbots Langley.

The application was before the Committee having been deferred at the planning committee meeting on 12 September following concerns relating to the use of the building.  An update on the additional information which had been received since that meeting was included in section 1 of the officer’s report.  The Committee heard that there were no changes to the proposal, which remained the same as presented at the 12 September meeting.

Councillor Sara Bedford spoke against the application.

A Member commented that the application proposed a meeting room to be used once or twice per year, with no associated condition which limited that use.  It was therefore suggested that approving the application would involve the introduction of business use into the Green Belt which could not be monitored or limited.

Committee Members discussed the benefits which the proposal would provide, such as increased storage and a home office area for the applicants, and the re-use of a building which would otherwise be derelict.  It was also considered that there were elements such as hardstanding for parking which might be considered to be harmful to the Green Belt.  In response to a question the planning officer expressed the view that commercial use at the site may be unacceptable, and therefore its use as a home office, with domestic storage for the sole use of the occupiers of Fortunes Farmhouse had been conditioned.

In debate it was considered that the wording of Condition 4 should be amended to reflect that the new parking spaces should only be used incidental to the enjoyment of, and ancillary to, the residential dwelling.

Councillor Whately-Smith proposed, and Councillor Gazzard seconded, that planning permission be granted with amended wording for Condition 4 to reflect that the new parking spaces should only be used incidental to the enjoyment of, and ancillary to, the residential dwelling.  On being put the vote the motion was carried, the voting being 9 For, 0 Against, 1 Abstention.

RESOLVED: that planning permission be granted subject to conditions, with amended wording for Condition 4 to reflect that the new parking spaces should only be used incidental to the enjoyment of, and ancillary to, the residential dwelling.

Erection of a single storey rear extension connecting the existing dwelling and outbuilding.

Recommendation: That planning permission be granted.

The application was for erection of a single storey rear extension connecting the existing dwelling and outbuilding at 96 Wolsey Road, Moor Park, Northwood.

The application was before the Committee as it had been called in by three members of the Planning Committee unless officers were minded to refuse planning permission, due to the impact on the Conservation Area and plot coverage.

The Planning Officer advised there was no update.

Elaine Tooke, Director of Moor Park (1958) Ltd spoke against the application.

In debate, Members considered whether the proposal would preserve or enhance the Conservation Area.  The Committee noted that the development would only be visible from within the application site.  The Planning Officer commented that officers did not consider that the development would detract from the Conservation Area and were therefore of the view that it did preserve the Conservation Area and was policy compliant.

The Committee noted that the outbuilding had originally been developed using permitted development rights.  A Committee Member expressed the view that the addition of the rear extension connecting it to the dwelling would result in a development with a larger footprint than might otherwise have been permitted.

The Planning Officer drew the Committee’s attention to Condition 4 which proposed the removal of permitted development rights in relation to Class E, meaning that the homeowner would not be able to construct another outbuilding elsewhere in the garden under permitted development.

A Member commented that although not visible from the road, the proposal would cause harm to the Conservation Area by virtue of its size.  Members also discussed the possibility of the development acting as a precedent for others.  The Planning Officer clarified that every planning application needed to be determined on its own merits, and approval of the application would not infer that other such developments within the Conservation Area would be granted approval.

The Chair moved, and Councillor Gazzard seconded, that planning permission be granted, subject to conditions.  On being put to the vote the motion was carried, the voting being 5 For, 4 Against, 1 Abstention.

RESOLVED:  that planning permission be granted subject to conditions.

Demolition of part of existing boundary wall; construction of fencing and gate; extension of gravel drive

and

Listed Building Consent: demolition of part of existing boundary wall; construction of fencing and gate; extension of gravel drive.

Recommendation 24/1316/FUL: That planning permission be granted subject to conditions.

Recommendation 24/1317/LBC: That listed building consent be granted subject to conditions.

The application was for planning permission and associated listed building consent for demolition of part of existing boundary wall; construction of fencing and gate and extension of gravel drive at Solesbridge House, Solesbridge Lane, Chorleywood. 

The application was before the Committee as the agent for the application is a District Councillor.

The Planning Officer reported that Condition 5 of the planning permission was to be amended as follows:

‘Prior to the first use of the extended driveway hereby approved, the proposed timber vehicular and pedestrian gates hereby permitted shall be installed in accordance with the approved plans with the gates to facilitate vehicular access retained as inward opening at all times.  The proposed pedestrian gate once erected shall not be materially enlarged to facilitate a vehicular access.’

The Planning Officer also informed the Committee that prior to the meeting the applicant had circulated a document to Members outlining their view of the acceptability of the proposal.

A Committee Member commented on the narrowness of Solesbridge Lane and the use of the space at the end of the driveway as a passing place. The Committee noted that the inward opening nature of the vehicular gate had been conditioned.

The Committee heard that the recommendations of the Conservation Officer had been addressed within conditions.

The Chair proposed, and Councillor Davies seconded, that planning permission be granted subject to conditions and on being put to the vote this was agreed unanimously.

The Chair proposed, and Councillor Davies seconded, that listed building consent be granted subject to conditions and on being put to the vote this was agreed unanimously.

RESOLVED:

(i)             That planning permission be granted subject to conditions;

(ii)            That listed building consent be granted subject to conditions.

Construction of single-storey front extension and first floor rear extension, conversion of garage into habitable accommodation and internal alterations, alterations to fenestration and extension of driveway.

Recommendation: That planning permission be granted.

The application was for construction of a single storey front extension and first floor rear extension, conversion of garage into habitable accommodation and internal alterations, alterations to fenestration and extension of driveway at 69 Sycamore Road, Croxley Green, Rickmansworth.

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

The Planning Officer advised that there was no update.

Parish Councillor Andrew Gallagher of Croxley Green Parish Council spoke against the application.

Kim Gardner, neighbour, spoke against the application.

Halit Ertas, agent, spoke in favour of the application.

The Committee noted a number of objections raised by the speakers against the application.  These included the character of the extensions; the impact of the front extension on the street scene; and concerns about impact on neighbouring amenity, particularly overshadowing of the garden and privacy concerns.

The Committee noted that the application site comprised one property within a terrace of three properties which were similar in style.  Whilst the proposal would involve change, for the reasons set out in the report officers were not of the view that the front extension would cause demonstrable harm to the character and appearance of the street scene.  With regard to the impact on neighbours, the front extension had a depth of 2m, and officers did not consider that it would cause harm to the neighbouring amenity.  The rear extension also complied with guidance and there was not considered to be any harm arising from the siting of any windows as part of the proposal.  Full considerations of these issues were set out in the officer’s report.

A Committee Member suggested that a site visit take place, in order to better understand the impact of the proposal on the street scene and neighbouring properties.   Another Committee Member questioned the need for a site visit given that the proposal was compliant with relevant policies.

Councillor Lloyd proposed, and Councillor Drury seconded, deferral of the application for a site visit.  On being put to the vote this proposal was agreed, the voting being 7 For, 2 Against, 1 Abstention.

RESOLVED: That the application is deferred for a site visit.

This application seeks advertisement consent for the erection of a digital display board.

Recommendation: That advertisement consent is granted subject to conditions.

The application was for advertisement consent for erection of a digital advertisement display board at Esso Service Station, Uxbridge Road, Rickmansworth.

The application was before the Committee as a District Councillor lived within the consultation area.

The Planning Officer provided an update that one further letter of objection had been received since the agenda was published.  This had raised concerns about light levels disturbing sleep and affecting drivers.  These issues were addressed within the officer’s report; the Highways Authority had not raised any objections; and conditions were proposed to control elements such as light levels.

The Planning Officer also clarified that the banner on the flank wall of the building which could be seen in the site photos attached to the report was no longer there and was unrelated to the application.

A Committee Member drew attention to the amount of advertising already present at the forecourt and the likely detrimental impact of an illuminated sign to the character of the area which was a gateway into Rickmansworth.  Officers responded that in the context of the existing petrol filling station where there was existing signage present the proposal was not considered to be harmful.  The agent had specified that there would be no moving images or animation displayed, and a condition was included in accordance with the model condition from the Institute of Lighting Professionals to control luminence.

It was suggested that an additional informative be added, to request the removal of the proliferation of banners.

The Chair moved, and Councillor Davies seconded, that advertisement consent be granted subject to conditions and the addition of an informative to request the removal of the proliferation of banners. On being put to the vote the motion was declared carried, the voting being 4 For, 4 Against and 2 Abstentions with the Chair exercising the casting vote.

RESOLVED: That advertisement consent be granted subject to conditions and the addition of an informative to request the removal of the proliferation of banners.