Agenda item

The Planning Officer advised that report before Members is a Preliminary Report. It sets out the planning history, site description, development description, comments received to date from consultees and the public and sets out the policy framework against which the application should be considered in order to aide discussion on the application.  The report does not assess the acceptability or otherwise of the proposal at this stage and Members are not being asked to determine the application.  Any points raised/questions asked by Members will be taken away by officers in order to ensure that Members have all the information they require when they are asked to determine the application in due course.  A full report will be returned to a future Planning Committee for determination and any party who has commented on the application will be notified ahead of this meeting.

Turning to the development proposed.  As set out in the report, the development is split between 5 main areas which are referred to as: Central Site; Island Site, Western Site; Triangle Site and Northern Access.

1.    Central Site – The Central site would include the 11 new sound stages, 4 x 3 storey offices and 3 x workshops.  The sound stages would range from 18m-21.5m in height, with the taller elements located within the site, away from the boundary.  The offices and workshops would have a maximum height of 12m.  It is proposed that offices face onto Gadeside in order to create an active frontage to the road.  The Central Site would also include the south gate entrance tower.

2.    Island Site – The Island Site would be home to the Studio Deck car park providing 2,500 spaces over 5 floors (including roof) and ranging from 11-15m in height, with the lower element closest to the residential properties in Ashfields to the east.  A studio support building is also proposed and would have a height of 11m.  The eastern part of the Island Site falls within Watford Borough Council’s area.  It is also relevant to note, as set out in the report, that the Island Site is allocated for Leavesden Studios Operations and associated uses in the current Site Allocations document.

3.    Western Site – The Western Site comprises of two elements.  Backlot 2 which currently has temporary consent is proposed to become permanent backlot space.  The Lower Field is located to the west of the public right of way (Gypsy Lane) and no built development or change of use is proposed here.  The submitted plans detail landscape and ecological enhancements to the lower field.

4.    Triangle Site – The Triangle Site is where a new southern access roundabout is proposed to serve the Studio Parking Deck and main Studios site.  A pedestrian bridge is also proposed between the Island site and Central site.  This would have a road clearance height of 5.5m.

5.       Northern Access – At the Northern Access, the studio north gate access is proposed to be widened to assist with traffic flow into the site.

In terms of updates since the publication of the agenda: We have received 1 additional objection.  The points raised reflect those set out in the report at Section 4.3.  Any further points made will be included in the report when it comes back to the Committee for determination.

In accordance with Council Procedure Rule 35(b) a member of the public spoke in support of the application and a member of the public spoke against.

Ward Councillor Stephen Giles-Medhurst was aware of the history of the site even prior to the construction on the site and had held discussions and attended exhibitions.  The Councillor wished to bring to attention the changes of the height in relation to the Island site as it was not clear in the report what was originally considered for that site in terms of heights although it now stated it would be reducing in scale but this was not clear how much it would be reducing in scale and what the effects would be on the bunding and shielding for the residents.  There had been no traffic impact study and no comments from the County Council so awaited comments on this at a future meeting.  It had been raised that there is some congestion there but having been there as early as 6 in the morning and 7.30 at night they had not noticed much at all.  One comment which had been raised was the pedestrian footbridge the main access to the studio from the car park and suggestions were made on whether it could have a cedar roof to increase biodiversity and what measures could be provided to further increase biodiversity with the new constructions.  The Councillor would like to see more details on the backlot and how that would be screened and how it would be seen on the slip road from the motorway.  This is a major concern of local residents.  They did appreciate the current temporary permission and that the amount of measures were more limited but if this was to become permanent as per the proposed application we do need to see some detailed visuals and how it will impact visually from a distance to see how this is mitigated in terms of that particular backlot.  The Councillor would like to seek assurances in terms of the fields which had been raised by the Gypsy Lane Residents Association so that there is no further expansion in that area.

The Planning Officer advised that the purpose tonight was to get Members comments/questions so that these can be covered in the report when it comes back to the Committee for determination. 

Councillor Matthew Bedford had a few points to raise.  On the 10% biodiversity net gain their assumption was that would apply but it would be helpful if officers could confirm that. 

The Planning Officer advised that when the report is updated they can ensure that figures are provided in terms of the biodiversity net gain and what would be achieved by this proposal but was not able to confirm at this time.  In terms of the matter of biodiversity net gain one of the speakers had referenced the Environment Act which was introduced as a Bill in 2019 and had been enacted following Royal assent in November last year.  The Bill proposes to mandate the requirement of 10% biodiversity net gain.  At the moment the NPPF talks about biodiversity net gain as does our Policy DM6 but they do not specify the amount.  What needs to happen for the Act to apply in England is for an amendment to the Town and Country Planning Act and this is unlikely to become law until 2023.  The officer would ensure that the report provides more detail on this and on the percentage of biodiversity net gain that is being achieved.

Councillor Matthew Bedford said that the most recent public consultation on our new Local Plan did show the whole of the lower field as public open space so clearly the Council is minded to go down that route.  A point was made about the Hunton Bridge roundabout being a view point which it was not as it was a monstrosity as is the motorway slip road so it was really difficult to say that we need to be over concerned about the view from there.  The Councillor was much more concerned about the view from any residential properties which in fact were minimal or indeed from any public rights of way such as from Gypsy Lane itself where currently the temporary permission provided good screening along Gypsy Lane.  In relation to all the new buildings along the side of the dual carriage way and the various slip roads that land was fairly elevated relative to the road and if we are now proposing 18-20 metre buildings on there then there also needs to be some thought on how that does not appear to be very imposing to people who are driving, jogging or cycling along there.

Councillor Philip Hearn said it would be useful if Members of the Committee could make a site visit and proposed this to the Committee.

Councillor Sara Bedford thought it was hoped that the report for determination would come back to Committee in July so we need to ensure that it was possible to visit Warner Bros site so that all Councillors could be made aware of the site to get an idea of the space and also the area outside.  The Councillor supported the site visit.

On being put to the Committee the motion was declared CARRIED the voting being unanimous.

The Planning Officer advised that they would ensure arrangements were made for a site visit prior to the application coming back to the Committee for determination.  With regard to the date the report may come back the deadline for reports for the June meeting was only a few weeks away so it would not come back to the June meeting with the July meeting likely to be the first available date. 

Councillor David Raw had given consideration to the details provided on the views by the public and residents around the area and asked whether it would be possible to have side views or 3D views which would give Members an idea of the type of buildings, the height and how they will look from the perspective of residents so that we can assist with details on the trees and the borders to hide some of the infrastructure.  Coming down to the Hunton Bridge roundabout the Councillor would still like to see the trees to hide the buildings.

The Planning Officer said there were a lot of drawings which are all available on line and would look to ensure that the plans which are most useful to Members are provided but it was not possible to show all the plans this evening due to the volume but will look to make them more accessible to Members.

Councillor Sara Bedford said one of the issues was that many of the views were internal to the site and the view from Hunton Bridge roundabout depended on which direction you were coming from.  Members needed to go around the outside of the site when making the site visit as well as going onto the site.  Not all the details had been included and a full report will come back to the Committee to a future meeting with the hope being in July.  Whenever this point comes up by email or in local groups there is a lot of local support for the economic benefits and the job benefits it brings to people in the area as well as some opposition. If you look at the planning history of Warner Bros and the Councillor would say this about any applicant in this situation you will see that there is not one application refused.  The reason for that is not because this Council has a history of just giving planning permission to Warners in whatever they ask for it is because the applicant has a history of listening to what Members say and residents and amending their plans to meet those concerns or issues raised.  The Councillor would encourage Members of the Committee and other Members to raise those concerns with the Planning Officer to allow them to take them up with the applicant and to get those concerns addressed because this had always been a successful route in the past.  Comments made by the Committee, when the tour opened, were we didn’t want parking on local streets and wanted a parking space to come with your ticket free so that meant there was no incentive to park on local streets because there were enough parking spaces for everyone who was admitted to the exhibition.  We also wanted time tickets as we did not want everyone arriving at one time so that it did not generate a problem with parking.  Both of these points were accepted by Warners.  There have been others but these are just two.  If people have concerns we have to try and talk it through.

The Chair referred within the report to the planting they would do and where they were looking to increase the size and age of some of the trees they were going to plant but there were no details on how long they would be maintained for or whether they would be replaced due to die back.  It was important that this is addressed in a future report.

The Planning Officer referred Members to section 3.10 of the report but would take away the points made.

Councillor Stephanie Singer said with regard to the trees when they are planted they are tiny and the pictures showed large trees so it would useful to have an assessment of how long a tree takes to get from its planting size to fully grown. 

Councillor David Raw said considering the historical nature of the site and the new build which is going to be put into place if it goes ahead is there anything which should be protected

The Planning Officer advised that there is a long planning history and a lot of archaeological surveys undertaken on site over the years and had always been considered and was a relevant consideration in terms of impact on heritage assets and any archaeological significance and is being addressed.

Councillor Raj Khiroya made an observation that there had been 44 objections and only 2 in support and felt a site visit was an excellent idea to understand the extent of the development and take into account the objections raised.

The Planning Officer would look to agree a route for the site visit and local Councillors would provide details of points to look at and view from during the site visit.

RESOLVED:

That Members undertake a site visit.

Noted there is no recommendation for approval or refusal at this stage in the consideration of the application.

Noted the report, and made general comments with regards to the material planning issues raised by the application.