Date of Meeting: 16 May 2019 APPLICATION NO: 18/2168/FUL DATE OF APPLICATION: 14 November 2018 STATUTORY START DATE: 14 November 2018 SITE LOCATION 459 Park Avenue, Bushey, Hertfordshire, WD23 2BW DEVELOPMENT Erection of a two storey extension comprising third and fourth storeys to provide 16 additional flats (14 x studios and 2 x 2 bedroom flats), provision of roof terrace and amendments to parking layout. AGENT APPLICANT Mr Chris Jones Firstplan Bramah House 65-71 Bermondsey Street London, SE1 3XF

KHR Properties Ltd. c/o Firstplan

WARD: Bushey North GREEN BELT: No CONSERVATION AREA: No LISTED BUILDING: No TREE PRESERVATION ORDER: No REASONS FOR COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION This is a major development that is subject to a legal agreement. 1.0 SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATION Grant planning permission subject to conditions (listed at the end of this report) and subject to the completion of suitably worded section 106 agreement for the provision of affordable housing (5 x studio flats and 1 x 2-bedroom flat, all to be Discounted Market Rent affordable units). 2.0 APPLICATION SITE AND SURROUNDINGS 2.1 The site is a relatively tall building in a modern style, with an L shaped footprint, that is angled so that its two wings both point towards Park Avenue at approximately 45 degrees to the street. Until recently it was an office building called Smiths Detection, but work has been underway for some time on converting it into flats. The conversion was initially authorised by a Prior Approval under the Permitted Development regulations in 2016, but subsequently in 2017 planning permission was

granted to enlarge the building, including by adding an extra floor (stepped in) to the taller of the two wings – which had six floors previously and now has seven. This application relates to the shorter of the two wings, which has three floors (this application is seeking permission to add two more floors). The conversion work is complete on the taller of the two wings, and some of those flats are now occupied. 2.2 Park Avenue is mainly characterised by semi-detached houses, but this site is located within the Otterspool Employment Area, which is an industrial and business estate that lies to the North of the residential street, touching it at this point. That is the reason why this former office building is located on a street that is otherwise mainly residential. Some warehouses can also be seen from the street, including a new one that stands immediately behind this site, and which belongs to the same owner (blue lines on the site location plan show land that is under the same ownership but which is not part of the application site). 2.3 The site has its own car park, which is surrounded by railings and two sets of entrance gates. Some trees have been planted in this car park. 3.0 THE PROPOSAL 3.1 Planning permission has already been granted for the conversion of the former office building to 56 flats, and that work is now completed as regards the taller of the two wings, with several of those flats already occupied. This application is seeking to add a further two floors on top of the shorter of the two wings (which currently has three floors). A roof terrace is to be included on the flat roof. The development would add a further 16 flats: of which 14 would be studios, and two would be 2-bedroom flats. 3.2 Key Characteristics

Site Area 4,500 square metres = 0.45 hectares

Density These 16 flats would be added to 56 already built, making a total of 72 flats on a site of 0.45 hectares. The density would therefore be 72 dwellings divided by 0.45 hectares = 160 dwellings per hectare.

Mix 14 x studio flats and 2 x 2-bedroom flats (of which 5 x studios and 1 x 2-bed to be affordable)

Dimensions 2 additional floors (with a flat roof) are proposed on top of an existing 3 storey block. To be 16m tall (currently the 3 storeys are 10m tall).

Car Parking Spaces 20 (for 16 flats) comprising 1 space for each of the 14 studios and 2 spaces for each of the 2-bedroom flats.

4.0 RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY:

The most significant entries in the following table are highlighted with grey backgrounds.

Reference Description Outcome and date

TP/80/0847 Alterations to provide additional office and storage space, together with enlarged loading bay.

Approval 19 February 1981

TP/81/0147 New electricity sub station

Approval 26 May 1981

TP/83/0405 Portakabin for storage and workshop use for temporary period of up to 12 months.

Approval 7 July 1983

TP/83/0732 Temporary portakabin for use as office and lecture room.

Approval 24 November 1983

TP/06/1370 Installation of new boundary fence and gates and entrance barrier.

Grant Permission 2 January 2007

TP/11/0846 To replace existing high level crital frame windows and doors to ground floor refurbished office space with new enlarged commercial aluminium windows and doors to match adjacent ground floor elevation white framed windows.

Grant Permission 13 July 2011

14/0981/EI1 Request for screening opinion (Environmental Impact Assessment).

Raise Objections 18 July 2014

14/1272/EI1 Request for screening opinion (Environmental Impact Assessment).

Response Given 10 March 2015

14/1722/FUL Demolition of existing light industrial/research and development buildings (with retention of existing offices (B1)) and erection of a new storage and distribution building (B8) to link to existing builders trade warehouse owned and occupied by M.P Moran and Sons accessed from Otterspool Way, provision of car parking, motorbike parking, cycle parking and landscaping (Additional Plans received 9/1/15).

Grant Permission 27 March 2015

16/0433/DOC Application for approval of details reserved by condition 6 of planning permission reference 14/1722/FUL

Condition Discharged 28 April 2016

16/1288/PD56 Change of use from (Class B1) offices to (Class C3) residential - Comprising 52 flats (19 x 2 bed, 12 x 1 bed and 21 x 1 bed studios)

PD56 - Prior Approval Refused 24 August 2016 The reasons for refusal related to inadequate details having been submitted on transport and highways impacts, contamination and noise, and also that the proposed on-site parking provision was insufficient.

16/1328/DOC Application for approval of details reserved by conditions 2 (contaminated land), 4 (piling method statement), 9 (method statement - demolition/construction) & 10 (contamination) of planning permission reference 14/1722/FUL.

Conditions part Discharged part not Disc 3 August 2017

16/1361/DOC Application for approval of details reserved by conditions 7 (External Lighting), 8 (Waste Management Plan), 16 (Security Lighting & CCTV) of planning permission reference 14/1722/FUL.

Conditions part Discharged part not Disc 17 October 2016

16/1680/DOC Application for approval of details reserved by condition 3 (surface water run-off) of planning permission reference 14/1722/FUL

Condition Discharged 20 October 2016

16/1686/DOC Application for approval of details reserved by condition 5 (servicing strategy) of planning permission reference 14/1722/FUL

Condition Discharged 20 October 2016

16/1973/PD56 Change of use from (Class B1) offices to (Class C3) residential comprising 52 flats (19 x 2 bed, 12 x 1 bed and 21 x 1 bed studios).

PD56 - Prior Approval Given 5 December 2016 NOTE: No affordable housing was required as this was a Permitted Development (whereas if it had been planning permission affordable housing would have been required).

16/2083/DOC Application for approval of details reserved by condition 8 (waste

Condition Discharged 14 November 2016

management plan) of planning permission reference 14/1722/FUL

17/0083/DOC Application for approval of details reserved by conditions 1 (proposed access arrangements) & 3 (construction management plan) of planning permission reference 16/1973/PD56.

Condition Discharged 21 February 2017

17/0196/FUL Installation of replacement windows, new exterior cladding, 27 new balconies and roof top stainless steel handrail with glass panels. Alteration of window and door openings (Amended description 20.03.17)

Grant Permission 23 March 2017

17/0578/DOC Application for approval of details reserved by condition 2 (relocation of bus stops) of planning permission reference 16/1973/PD56

Condition Discharged 20 April 2017

17/0824/VOC Removal of condition 2 (scheme for off site highway improvement) attached to planning permission reference 16/1973/PD56 as the bus stop is no longer in use.

Grant Permission 21 June 2017

17/0858/FUL Extension to existing 6th floor structure & installation of 4 No. new windows to provide additional 1 x 3 and 1 x 2 bed flats. Single storey side extensions to facilitate bike store, metre room and bin store and internal alterations to existing ground floor to provide additional 2 x 2 bed flats.

Grant Planning Permission 7 July 2017 NOTE: No affordable housing was required as this was assessed as planning permission for 4 additional flats beyond the 52 already approved under Permitted Development Prior Approval 16/1973/PD56 (i.e. it was not assessed as planning permission for a 56 flat development).

17/1967/PA1 Pre-application enquiry for a 3 storey extension comprising 24 additional flats.

Advice was given at a meeting, and also by letter on 12 Jan 2018. Advised to reduce the proposed extension to 2 storeys rather than 3 to reduce its visual dominance. Affordable

housing would be required.

17/2119/DOC Application for approval of details reserved by condition 4 (details of rooftop) of planning permission reference 17/0858/FUL

Condition not Discharged 22 December 2017

17/2256/DOC Application for approval of details reserved by condition 3 (Water run-off scheme) of planning permission reference 17/0858/FUL

Condition Discharged 9 October 2018

18/0104/VOC Application for variation of condition 4 (to amend the wording regarding rooftop planting) & removal of condition 5 following grant of planning permission 17/0858/FUL

Grant Permission 16 November 2018

18/0778/DOC Application for approval of details reserved by condition 3 (privacy screens) of planning permission reference 17/0196/FUL

Condition Discharged 9 October 2018

18/2224/DOC Application for approval of details reserved by condition 3 (Details of proposed rooftop planting) of planning permission reference 18/0104/VOC

Condition Discharged 30 Nov 2018

5.0 CONSULTATION & RESPONSES 5.1 Notices Site Notice (Generic) 29th Nov 2018 Expiry Date: 20th Dec 2018 Press notice in Watford Observer 30th Nov 2018 Expiry Date: 21st Dec 2018 5.2 Summary of consultation responses The following table list is of the internal, statutory and partner agencies or organisations which were consulted on 20.11.2018 and 26.11.2018; and the responses that were received are set out in the table beneath the list:

Parking Operations team, Hertsmere Borough Council Senior Traffic Engineer, Hertsmere Borough Council Drainage Services, Hertsmere Borough Council Environmental Health & Licensing, Hertsmere Borough Council Waste Management Services, Hertsmere Borough Council Tree Officer, Hertsmere Borough Council Housing team, Hertsmere Borough Council CIL Officer, Hertsmere Borough Council

Highways Service, Hertfordshire County Council Minerals & Waste Team, Spatial Planning & Economy Unit, Herts County Council Hertfordshire Ecology, Hertfordshire County Council Flood Risk & Sustainable Drainage Officer, Hertfordshire County Council Planning Obligations (Growth & Infrastructure) Unit, Hertfordshire County Council Health & Community Services Management Board (Hertfordshire County Council) Hertfordshire Fire & Rescue Service Building Control EDF Energy Networks Cadent Gas Limited (Previously National Grid Company Plc ) Thames Water Affinity Water Limited Herts & Middlesex Wildlife Trust NHS England Highways England Transport For London Councillors L. Silver, L. Davis, K. Merchant, J. West & H. Cohen

Consultees Response

Drainage Services Hertsmere Borough Council

A response was received on 27.11.2018. VERBATIM: “No comments.”

Environmental Health & Licensing Hertsmere Borough Council

A response was received on 17.12.2018. VERBATIM: “Environmental Health raises no objection.”

Waste Management Services Hertsmere Borough Council

A response was received on 12.12.2018. VERBATIM: “Application does not address the requirement to increase the number of refuse and recycling containers required to service the properties. Applicant needs to demonstrate they have included an increase in capacity for refuse and recycling and the calculation applied.”

Highways Hertfordshire County Council

A response was received on 10.12.2018. SUMMARY: No objection, subject to a pre-commencement condition to require a Construction Management Plan. Park Avenue is designated as a Local Distributor Road. It already includes traffic calming measures. The existing highway access is to be used. Visibility for traffic exiting the site is acceptable. It is for the Local Planning Authority (Hertsmere Borough Council) to assess the adequacy of the proposed parking provision – not the Highway Authority (Hertfordshire County Council).

The Highway Authority do not dispute the conclusions of the Transport Statement that has been submitted – which are that the number of additional vehicle trips generated by the proposed development will not have a significantly detrimental impact on the operation of the local highway network. Bus stops nearby on Park Avenue will allow for the use of public transport. The site is relatively well located for sustainable travel options. There are no existing clusters of road collision statistics near the site, and the proposal is not considered to present a hazard to road safety. Subject to their recommended condition being applied to require a Construction Management Plan so as to minimise the impact of construction vehicles on the road network, the Highway Authority do not object to this proposal.

Hertfordshire Fire & Rescue Service

A response was received, dated 23.11.2018. VERBATIM: “We have examined the drawings and note that the access for fire appliances and provision of water supplies appears to be adequate. Please be advised that if this is not the case then fire appliance access will need to comply with Approved Document B-B5-Volume 1- Table 8 & Diagram 24. Further comments will be made when we receive details of the Building Regulations application.”

Minerals & Waste Team, Spatial Planning And Economy Unit Hertfordshire County Council

A response was received dated 29.11.2018. They do not object to the application, but wish the Local Planning Authority to have regard to various issues pertaining to waste management. SUMMARY: The NPPF recognises waste as a strategic issue, and specific national policy is set out in the National Planning Policy For Waste (Oct 2014) which states that Local Planning Authorities should ensure that developments make sufficient and discrete provision for bins, and that construction waste is minimised and disposed of appropriately. HCC’s Waste Site Allocations Development Plan Document 2011-2026 (adopted July 2014) identifies a site (ELAS192 Otterspool Way Industrial Estate) that is adjacent to the application site as an Employment Land Areas of Search (ELAS). Should the need arise it is also possible that waste management processes could come forward elsewhere on the Otterspool Way Industrial Estate.

Waste Policy 12 (Sustainable Design, Construction and Demolition) requires all relevant construction projects to be accompanied by a Site Waste Management Plan. The County Council are willing to assess such a plan either at this stage, or later if required by a condition.

Housing Hertsmere Borough Council

A response was received on 04.12.2018. VERBATIM: “The development is for 16 additional properties therefore a percentage of affordable housing would be required. Currently only market value properties are proposed. More information is set out in the Council’s Affordable Housing Supplementary Planning Document. At this stage Housing would not support this development as it does not meet affordable housing requirements.”

Flood Risk & Sustainable Drainage Officer Hertfordshire County Council

A representation was received on 6th Dec 2018 VERBATIM: “The existing rainwater downpipes will be extended to serve the additional floors. There is to be no increase in building roof area and thus no increase in runoff from the building and no amendments are proposed to the existing drainage system. Therefore we have no objection to the above application.”

CIL Officer Hertsmere Borough Council

The case officer has discussed the application with the CIL officer.

Transport For London

A response was received dated 21.11.2018 as follows: VERBATIM: “Thank you for consulting Transport for London. The proposed development does not appear to have any impact on TfL services or infrastructure and so we have no comments to make on the application.”

Planning Obligations (Growth & Infrastructure) Unit Hertfordshire County Council

A response was received, dated 23.11.2018. VERBATIM: “Hertfordshire County Council’s Growth & Infrastructure Unit do not have any comments to make in relation to financial contributions required by the Toolkit, as this development is situated within Hertsmere’s CIL Area B and does not fall within any of the CIL Reg 123 exclusions. Notwithstanding this, we reserve the right to seek Community Infrastructure Levy contributions towards the provision of infrastructure as outlined in your R123 List through the appropriate channels.”

5.3 Representations received from the public Consultation letters were sent to 493 neighbouring premises on 21.11.2018. Two site notices were put up on 29th November 2018. A press notice was published in the Watford Observer local newspaper on 30th November 2018.

In Support Against Comments Neighbours Notified

Contributors Received

1 11 0 493 12

The following is a summary of the points that were raised by members of the public. 5.4 SUMMARY OF COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC IN SUPPORT:

A resident of Highwood Avenue writes in support of the application, saying that a

previously run-down office building now looks more attractive, which has raised

house prices in the area.

She adds that, despite her initial misgivings about parking overspill, in fact she

has not noticed any impact on local parking congestion arising from the recently

completed and occupied part of the development.

5.5 SUMMARY OF OBJECTIONS FROM THE PUBLIC:

The proposal would constitute over-development of the site.

The existing building is already an eyesore and to enlarge it would exacerbate

that.

A previous application to extend to four stories was refused for lack of parking

spaces, and this should be too. On-street parking congestion is already a

problem in this street and it will be exacerbated by the development.

One parking space per two bedroom flat is not enough.

Are there adequate parking spaces for the disabled?

The proposed new parking spaces could block the fire escape.

Tandem parking will be impracticable for the residents, and this may cause them

to park on the street instead.

Any spare parking space within the site should be made available to existing

residents (rather than allocated to new additional residents) so that they would

have sufficient parking within the site and not have to park on the street.

The existing building already has inadequate parking for the number of residents,

resulting in overspill onto the street, which is now congested and partially

obstructed, making driving difficult, with reduced visibility. Parking on verges has

resulted in damage to them. The parking survey from 2011 is out of date, with

local families who have adult children having several cars. The type and age of

residents of the development will be different to those of the surrounding area,

and this should have been taken into account.

These flats are not needed for the local area, as there is already a block of flats

being built nearby on the Park Avenue roundabout.

Local infrastructure will not be able to cope, including health care, roads which

are congested and polluted, and schools which are oversubscribed.

A resident disagrees with the conclusions of the Transport Assessment regarding

likely vehicle trip generation.

The road is already used as a cut through, and traffic queues develop. The

proposal could exacerbate this.

A resident disputes the claim in the Transport Assessment that there is a bus

stop 70m from the site. He also points out that no bus route nearby (W18, W19

or 602) serves Watford Junction Station, and that the Metropolitan Line Extension

which had been proposed has recently been cancelled. Another residents writes

that bus 602 only runs once per two hours, and the bus 398 only runs once a

day. The bus service is unpopular and that it is unlikely to be used by new

residents.

The idea of residents cycling to local stations and facilities is unrealistic. Those

who have recently moved into the main block are not commuting by bicycle.

The developers carried out a public consultation but have ignored concerns that

were raised. Their claim that they received positive comments is disputed by a

local resident who attended the event.

Since “the abolition of proper building control” numerous unsightly flatted

developments have arisen around North Bushey, and this will be another. There

should be no more flatted developments allowed on this site or anywhere in North

Bushey.

The area has an unreliable and infrequent bus service and inadequate local

shops and services.

A neighbour complains that when this building was originally converted to

residential use she was not consulted, and her home is now overlooked from the

rooftop terrace on the larger of the buildings. The new proposal would result in

her property being overlooked at even closer quarters.

The building would become too large and out of proportion to its context in the

street-scene. Such a large development is not appropriate in this street.

The proposed colour and style would be out of keeping with the surroundings.

The existing building already threatens the privacy of the front bedrooms of 296

Park Avenue, and the proposal would make that worse.

296 Park Avenue has already suffered a loss of light to their front windows, and

the proposed development would make that worse. 300 Park Avenue write that

they are not currently adversely affected as regards overshadowing, but they

fear that they would be harmed by the additional storeys that are proposed.

Part of the building is already occupied and cars leaving the parking area at night

shine their headlamps into the windows of neighbouring houses.

Residents who make use of their balconies at night might be noisy and disturb

neighbours. The proposal could exacerbate such a problem.

Balconies will threaten the privacy of the front windows and front gardens of

neighbouring residential premises.

The sunlight / overshadowing report should have been based on the original

Smiths building, not only on the additional storeys which are now proposed. A

neighbour at 298 complains that he has already suffered overshadowing as a

result of extra levels above the original Smiths building.

A resident feels that he should be entitled to a Council Tax rebate because he

has had to put up with living opposite this building site for two years, and has

suffered disturbance arising from the works.

Given the number of flats on this site, and the care home that has been

established nearby, an additional GP surgery should be provided.

6.0 PLANNING POLICY CONTEXT 6.1 National Policy & Guidance National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) Feb 2019 Planning Practice Guidance (PPG) 6.2 The Development Plan Adopted Hertsmere Local Plan: Development Plan Document Core Strategy 2013

SP1 - Creating sustainable development SP2 – Presumption in favour of sustainable development CS1 - Location and Supply of new Homes CS2 – The Location of New Homes CS12 – The Enhancement of the Natural Environment CS16 – Environmental Impact of Development CS22 - Securing a High Quality and Accessible Environment CS25 - Accessibility and parking

Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Plan 2016

SADM3 – Residential developments SADM19 – Waste Storage in New Development SADM30 – Design Principles SADM40 – Highway and Access Criteria for New Development

6.3 Supplementary Planning Guidance / Documents

Emerging Part D: Guidelines for Development (consultation draft 2016) Parking Standards Supplementary Planning Document (2014)

7.0 ASSESSMENT 7.1 Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 states that 'If regard is to be had to the development plan for the purposes of any determination to be made under the Planning Acts, the determination must be made in accordance with the development plan unless material consideration indicate otherwise'. 7.2 Principle of Development 7.3 Although it fronts onto a residential street, the application site is located within the designated Otterspool Way employment area (being a converted former office building that backs onto a warehouse belonging to the same owner). Policy CS8 states that releases of vacant employment land should only be considered following an assessment of the suitability of the site for continuing employment use, and in some cases an Employment Land Needs Assessment may be required. However in this case the principle of the land being used for residential development has already been established under prior approval 16/1783/PD56, which allowed the conversion of the former office building to 52 flats under Permitted Development regulations, and subsequently by planning permission 17/0858/FUL which allowed a further 4 flats. Many of those flats have been completed and are now occupied, so it is clear that the site no longer serves an employment use, and that the proposal for residential use is acceptable in principle. The fact that Park Avenue is mainly a residential street is another factor that supports allowing a residential use here. 7.4 There is an identified need for additional housing in the area, and this development would contribute 16 new dwellings of varying sizes, making a useful contribution – particularly as a third of them are now to be Affordable Housing units – see below for details. 7.5 Creating Sustainable Development 7.6 “Sustainable development” is that which meets the needs of current generations without jeopardising the needs of future generations, and which can be regarded as sustainable in terms of its economic, environmental and social impacts. As is set out elsewhere in this report, the proposal will not harm the environment in terms of its aesthetic or ecological impact, it will be socially acceptable because it will provide an adequate standard of accommodation without harming the amenity of neighbours, and it will cause no economic harm because it has already been established that, despite being in a designated Employment Area, this land no longer serves an employment function. 7.7 Affordable Housing Provision and Dwelling Mix 7.8 A mix of flat sizes is proposed comprising 14 x studio flats and 2 x 2-bedroom flats. In this outer part of Bushey the homes are mainly family sized houses, so the introduction of flats for smaller households will add some variety to the local housing provision, thereby ensuring that everyone is catered for.

7.9 Policy CS4 (Affordable Housing) requires that a development of 5 or more dwellings should normally provide 35% affordable housing, although this policy must now be interpreted in the light of the more up to date National Planning Policy Framework (Feb 2019) which states that only Major Developments (i.e. for 10 or more new dwellings) should be required to provide affordable housing. As the proposal is for 16 flats, it is clear that affordable housing should be sought. 7.10 As is explained in the Planning History section of this report (above), there have been two previous approvals for flats on this site totalling 56 flats (which are now completed and many of which are occupied) and it is worth noting here that neither of those approvals included any provision of affordable housing. The first application (16/1973/PD56) was for a Prior Approval for the conversion of the office building into 52 flats, under the Permitted Development regulations that had been introduced by the government to allow for such conversions without the need to apply for planning permission. When prior approval was granted in 2016 it was not possible for the Council to require any affordable housing (as would have been possible if the application had been for planning permission) because it was a Permitted Development. The second application was for planning permission (17/0858/FUL) as it involved some extensions and external alterations (which would not have been Permitted Development) and some amendments to the design so as to include an additional four flats – making a total of 56 flats. It is not clear why on that occasion the Council did not require that 35% of the 56 flats should be Affordable Housing units. No affordable housing was provided, and the planning officer’s report for 17/0858/FUL makes no mention of the issue of affordable housing. The officer is no longer with the Council. Thus the developer has obtained permission to create 56 flats without having so far been required to provide any affordable housing at all. 7.11 When the current application was submitted seeking planning permission for another 16 flats (making 72 flats in total) the developers were still not proposing to provide any affordable housing. The application was accompanied by an Economic Viability Appraisal Report (although its cover is labelled “confidential” the agent has since agreed to its being published on the Council’s website) which attempted to argue that the scheme would not have been economically viable if it had provided any affordable housing. Given that the applicant had already owned the land, and that therefore its purchase price for the purpose of this development was effectively zero, planning officers were sceptical, and asked a specialist consultant to review the Viability Assessment. The result of this review was that the applicants agreed to provide affordable housing units after all. 7.12 The applicants are now proposing that 6 of the 16 flats would be Affordable Housing units. Of the 14 studio flats, 5 will be affordable, and of the 2 two-bedroom flats, one will be an affordable unit. Policy CS4 requires that 35% of the homes in the development should be affordable. 35% of 16 is 5.6, which is rounded up to 6 units – which is indeed what is being offered. The offer is therefore now fully compliant with Policy CS4. 7.13 The type of affordable housing that is being offered is Discounted Market Rent units. Although fairly new, this is a nationally recognised type of affordable housing

(it is also known as Affordable Housing For Rent) and it is included in the definition of Affordable Housing in the glossary of the National Planning Policy Framework (Feb. 2019). Unlike more conventional types of affordable housing which are typically sold to a Registered Social Landlord (i.e. a housing association), this type is retained by the land owner, but the rent is capped at a maximum of 80% of the standard market rent for that area, and the terms are controlled by a Section 106 legal agreement. In this case the applicant wishes to retain ownership of the whole building, with all the flats being rented, which is why they have opted for Discounted Market Rent as their preferred type of affordable housing. 7.14 The Council’s Housing Officer is satisfied that the proposed affordable mix of 5 x studios and 1 x 2-bed unit is reasonable (given that there are only two 2-bed units proposed in the development altogether) provided that a satisfactory Section 106 agreement is signed, which should be worded so that nomination rights are retained by the Council to ensure that we are able to nominate people from our Housing List to be placed in the affordable homes. 7.15 Character and Appearance 7.16 The development will be an enlargement of an existing flatted development, so the fact that Park Avenue is mainly characterised by two storey semi-detached houses is beside the point. This relatively tall building has stood on this street for several decades already and is an established part of the street-scene. The proposed extra two storeys will be on the shorter of its two wings, so that the development will remain lower than the existing height of the taller wing. That taller wing has six main storeys plus a new seventh storey that is set-back penthouse-style; the shorter wing currently has three storeys, and the proposal would add two more – so it would have five storeys compared to the other wing’s six / seven. It is considered that this development would not result in the building appearing excessively large or out of place, given that it is already the largest building in the street-scene and has long been the focal point of the street. 7.17 The smooth grey finish that has been given to the building as part of the previously approved conversion to residential use would be continued for the extra two storeys, so that they will appear as an integral part of the overall development. The flats will not appear identical to those below them because they will have larger windows and also balconies, lending some variety to the design to avoid monotony. Having more glazing in their front elevations, these upper floors will appear lighter and this will help to avoid the development appearing unduly bulky or top-heavy. 7.18 Living Conditions 7.19 The National Planning Policy Framework (2019) paragraph 127f and footnote 46 state that new development should provide a high standard of amenity for existing and future users, and that “policies may…make use of the nationally described space standard, where the need for an internal space standard can be justified.”

7.20 Such a justification exists in Hertsmere because the adopted Hertsmere Local Plan, Site Allocations And Development Policies Plan (adopted 2016) section 2.23 states that standards of amenity in new residential development will be expected to comply with internal space standards, as set out in the Planning and Design Guide SPD. That SPD is an adopted supplementary planning document, but the old internal space standards that it includes have been superseded by the government’s document Technical Housing Standards: Nationally Described Internal Space Standards, and those newer national standards are referred to in the emerging Planning And Design Guide Part D (Guidelines for High Quality Sustainable Development) supplementary planning document (consultation draft published in October 2016). The government’s Nationally Described Internal Space Standards are therefore a material planning consideration in this case. 7.21 In the table that is set out below it is assumed that each of the 2-bedroom flats will have three occupants: a couple in the main bedroom and a child in the second bedroom.

Dwelling Requirement Proposal Complies?

Studio flats (for a single occupant)

Studio flat with shower: 39m² Studio flat with bath: 37m²

Each of the 14 studio flats would be 38m² with a shower.

All comply

2-bedroom flat (assuming 3 occupants):

61m²

Both the 2-bedroom flats would be 82m²

Both comply

7.22 The studio flats will all be single aspect, which is unavoidable given that this wing of the building backs onto a warehouse at close quarters; but at least they will have large windows and balconies which will face South-East. The two larger flats will have two aspects, as they will have bedroom windows in the side elevations. 7.23 Among the supporting documents that were submitted with this application is an Internal Daylight Analysis Report by Syntegra Consulting, which shows that all of the proposed flats would comply with the criteria that are set out by the Building Research Establishment (BRE) for acceptable levels of day light and sun light in the kitchens, living rooms and bedrooms. 7.24 Landscaping and trees 7.25 No gardens are proposed for this flatted development; but the car park has already been partially laid out, and this includes some newly planted semi-mature trees, which are already making a positive contribution to the street-scene. 7.26 Car Parking and Highways Impacts

7.27 The National Planning Policy Framework 2019, and Policy CS25 of the Core Strategy 2013, Policy SADM40 of the Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Plan 2016 and the Parking Standards supplementary planning document all seek to ensure that new development provides suitable access and parking provision. 7.28 The application proposes to utilise the existing vehicular access to the site and Hertfordshire Highways, having reviewed the application and the Transport Statement that was submitted with it, have raised no objections, advising that they do not consider that the proposed development would bring about a significant detrimental impact on traffic movements on the local highway network. 7.29 Hertfordshire Highways requested that a pre-commencement condition be applied to require the submission of a Construction Management Plan. However in this case work has been on-going for several months already on the first phase of the scheme (as was previously approved) and it has been evident that there is enough space within the site to accommodate materials storage, contractors facilities etc, without any significant problems having arisen of obstruction of the public highway, mud deposits on the highway etc (the site is not muddy), so in this case it is considered that such a pre-commencement condition would not be justified. Pre-commencement conditions should only be applied when without them it would have been necessary to have refused permission. Instead an informative note should be included to remind the developers of their responsibilities as regards not damaging, dirtying or obstructing the public highway. 7.30 The Parking Standards supplementary planning document (adopted July 2014) sets out requirements for communal car parking and cycle parking. Both are in Section 2 figure 1, which is a table that unfortunately does not have its columns clearly labelled – in fact the middle column relates to car parking requirements and the right column relates to cycle parking. 7.31 The Parking Standards SPD states that studio flats should have 1.5 car parking spaces each, so in this case the requirement is that there should be 21 car parking spaces for the 14 studio flats; whereas 2-bedroom flats should have 2 car parking spaces each (there are two such flats so the requirement is 4 spaces). Therefore the requirement should be 20 car parking spaces in total for these 16 flats. This should be in addition to the parking spaces already provided for the 56 flats of the previously approved Phase I development. The proposal is to provide 20 additional car parking spaces, so the application complies with the Parking Standards SPD. 7.32 Several objectors to this application have mentioned that they were concerned that the development might give rise to an increase in parking on local streets. However, given that the proposal complies with the Council’s Parking Standards supplementary planning document, these fears would seem to be unfounded. If it were to be the case that Park Avenue became congested with parked cars, there would be other ways outside the Planning system that the Council could address that problem – such as by consulting local residents on whether they would like to see single or double yellow lines or a Controlled Parking Zone introduced.

7.33 Cycle Storage 7.34 The Parking Standards supplementary planning document states that studio flats and 2-bedroom flats alike should have cycle storage provision of 1 space per unit, plus 1 short-term space per 5 units (for visitors). In this case a total of 80 secure cycle storage spaces are proposed for residents, plus 14 short-term spaces for visitors. These are to serve the whole development of 72 flats (Phase 1 that is already occupied has 56 flats, plus Phase II that is the subject of this application is to have 16 flats), so the provision should be at least 72 secure cycle spaces for residents, plus 14 short-term cycle spaces for visitors – i.e. a total of 86 cycle spaces. The proposal to provide 80 spaces for residents plus 14 for visitors (94 in total) and therefore it exceeds the requirements of the Parking Standards SPD. 7.35 Drainage and Flood Risk 7.36 It is obvious firstly that, as the development will be on the upper floors of an existing building, the new flats will not suffer from flooding themselves; and secondly that, as the building will not have any greater roof area than it already has, the development will not cause any more rainwater run-off than the building already causes. 7.37 The application was accompanied by a Flood Risk Assessment letter by EAS consultants. The Council’s own Drainage Officer has reviewed the application and has raised no objection. Hertfordshire County Council are the Lead Local Flood Authority, and they have also reviewed the application; they had no objection, noting that there would be no additional surface area created, and that the proposal to extend the existing rainwater downpipes would be an acceptable strategy. 7.38 Waste Storage 7.39 Policy SADM19 of the Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Plan 2016 seeks to ensure that adequate waste storage is provided in new development. The Council’s Waste Services team have reviewed the application, and they have commented that more detail is needed to demonstrate that adequate waste and recycling facilities would be provided. A pre-occupation condition should be applied to require that additional information. 7.40 Impact on Amenity of Neighbouring Premises 7.41 Policy SADM30 of the Site Allocations and Development Management Policies 2016 and the emerging Part D of the Planning and Design Guide (2016 consultation draft) require that the privacy and amenity of adjacent residential properties should not be harmed. 7.42 The site backs onto a new warehouse that belongs to the applicant, and which is of a similar height to that which is proposed for this development. For that reason the new studio flats would all have their windows in the front elevation, i.e. facing

South-East, and the same would apply to the two end flats (the 2-bedroom units) except that those would each also have one side-facing bedroom window that would face South-West. All of these windows would look out towards the street at an angle of approximately 45 degrees, meaning that they would not be directly facing the windows of any houses on the opposite side of the street. It is true that anyone using the roof terrace would be able to face the houses opposite (320-294 Park Avenue) but the distance would be sufficient to ensure that their privacy was not unreasonably threatened – the distance from the nearest corner of the building to the nearest house at 298 Park Avenue is 41 metres. In any case it would only be the fronts of those houses that would be seen, which are their public faces. 7.43 Among the specialist consultants’ reports that were submitted with the application is a Daylight, Sunlight and Overshadowing Report by Syntegra Consulting, which assesses whether the extra two storeys on the lower of the existing building’s wings would be likely to cause significant harm to any neighbour by overshadowing them or blocking daylight or sunlight to sensitive areas such as their principal windows, patios etc. It assesses the potential impact on each neighbour in the vicinity, and concludes that the impact in each case would be negligible. Given the fact that the building stands alone, well separated from the nearest residential neighbours, this conclusion is not surprising. 7.44 There will be no significant impact on the amenity of any residential neighbouring premises arising from this development. 8.0 COMMUNITY INFRASTRUCTURE LEVY 8.1 The Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) is a charge to support the delivery of funds to infrastructure in Hertsmere. The Planning Authority became a CIL charging authority as of 1st December 2014. The proposal is chargeable under the Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010 (as amended) because new dwellings are proposed (a net gain of 16 dwellings). The site lies within CIL Area B, where the rate is £180 per square metre (index linked) based on the net increase of gross internal floor-space created. 8.2 This application was accompanied by a CIL Additional Information Form. No exemption is being claimed. The CIL Additional Information Form states that the total gross internal floorspace that is proposed would be 880.58m² and as there will be no demolition that figure will also be the net additional gross internal floorspace. The CIL contribution is subject to indexation, but would currently stand at £208,907.47. It should be noted however that, as the proposal is now that 6 of the 16 flats would be affordable units, it would be possible for the developer to apply for Social Housing Relief on those units if the appropriate claim is submitted prior to work commencing. 9.0 EQUALITIES AND DIVERSITY 9.1 The Equality Act 2010 came into force in April 2011. Section 149 of the Act introduced the public sector equality duty, which requires public authorities to have

'due regard' to the need to eliminate discrimination on the grounds of the relevant protected characteristics, namely: age, disability, gender reassignment, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion and belief, sex and sexual orientation, and to advance equality of opportunity. In relation to this specific application due regard has been made to the protected characteristics and it is considered that there would be no adverse impact caused following this development. 10.0 CONCLUSION 10.1 Although the application, when it was first submitted in October 2018, was considered unacceptable on the grounds that no affordable housing was being offered, negotiations have taken place and that issue has now been resolved – the applicant is now offering to fully comply with our policy by proposing that more than 35% of the flats will be affordable units (Discounted Market Rent). 10.2 The proposed flats would provide an adequate standard of accommodation, they would have sufficient off-street parking space for cars and cycles, and they would not threaten the amenity of any neighbouring premises. The Highway Authority have not objected; and although they suggested a pre-commencement condition to ensure that the construction works would not affect the public highway, we have already seen from the earlier phases of development on this site that the construction work can be carried out without causing such harm, as there is adequate space to store materials etc within the site, and therefore it is considered that a pre-commencement condition would not be justified in this case, and that an informative note would suffice. 10.3 As the only unsatisfactory aspect of this application (lack of affordable housing) has now been addressed, it is recommended that this application be approved, subject to the receipt of a satisfactory signed Section 106 agreement. On the date of writing this report the Section 106 agreement has not yet been completed, but it might have been by the time the Planning Committee meets. Failing that, the recommendation is a resolution to approve, subject to receipt of a satisfactory signed Section 106. 11.0 RECOMMENDATION Grant planning permission subject to conditions (listed below) and subject to the completion of a suitably worded section 106 agreement for the provision of affordable housing (5 x studio flats and 1 x 2-bedroom flat, all of which are to be Discounted Market Rent affordable units). 12.0 CONDITIONS & REASONS FOR THEM 1.

The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of 3 years from the date of this permission. Reason: To comply with the requirements of Section 91 of the Town and

Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended). 2. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with

the following approved plans and documents: Site Location Plan, ref: 0406-34-000.11 Existing Site Plan, ref: 0406-34-000ex.12 Rev A Proposed Site Plan, ref: 0406-34-000.12 Rev F Existing Ground - Second Floor Plans, ref: 0406-34-100.01 Rev C Proposed Ground - Second Floor Plans, ref: 0406-34-100.02 Rev B Existing Third - Fifth Floor Plans, ref: 0406-34-100.03 Rev C Proposed Third - Fifth Floor Plans, ref: 0406-34-100.04 Rev D Existing Sixth and Roof Plans, ref: 0406-34-100.05 Rev B Proposed Sixth and Roof Plans, ref: 0406-34-100.06 Rev C Existing and Proposed Perspectives, ref: 0406-34-200.01 Rev A Existing South-East Elevation, ref: 0406-34-300.01 Proposed South-East Elevation, ref: 0406-34-300.02 Rev C Existing South-West Elevation, ref: 0406-34-300.03 Proposed South-West Elevation, ref: 0406-34-300.04 Rev C Existing North-West Elevation, ref: 0406-34-300.05 Proposed North-West Elevation, ref: 0406-34-300.06 Rev C Existing North-East Elevation, ref: 0406-34-300.07 Proposed North-East Elevation, ref: 0406-34-300.08 Sections through three storey wing, ref: 0406-34-400.01 Rev A Planning Statement ref 17271, dated Oct 2018 Transport Statement dated Aug 2018 Daylight, Sunlight & Overshadowing Report ref 17-3800 dated July 2018 Internal Daylight Analysis Report ref 17-3800, dated July 2018 Flood Risk Letter dated 14 Aug 2018 & appendices Economic Viability Appraisal Report dated Nov 2018 Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning.

3.

The external walls of the proposed additional storeys shall be finished in materials to match the colour, texture and style of the existing first and second floors beneath them. Reason: In the interests of the visual amenity of the site, pursuant to Policy SADM30 (Design Principles) of the Hertsmere Local Plan: Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Plan 2016.

4.

None of the flats that are hereby approved shall be occupied until details have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority to demonstrate that the development will be served by adequate facilities for the disposal and recycling of waste, and that these facilities will be located and designed to be convenient and serviceable without harming the visual amenity of the site, the amenity of residents, or the street-scene. Reason: To ensure that the new homes will be adequately provided with

services for the disposal of waste, and that recycling of refuse will be facilitated, pursuant to Policy SADM19 (Waste Storage in New Development) of the Hertsmere Local Plan: Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Plan 2016.

5.

None of the flats that are hereby approved shall be occupied until the car and cycle parking spaces have been made available to all the new residents as per the approved drawings 0406-34-000.12 rev F, and as set out in the Transport Statement. Those spaces shall be retained thereafter for the use of the occupants of these flats, as set out in the Transport Statement. Reason: To ensure that the new homes will be adequately provided with car parking and cycle storage spaces, and that the development will not be likely to cause overspill parking on public streets, pursuant to Policy CS25 (Accessibility and Parking) of the Hertsmere Local Plan: Core Strategy 2013, and Policy SADM40 (Highway and Access Criteria for New Development) of the Hertsmere Local Plan: Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Plan 2016, and the adopted Parking Standards supplementary planning document (2014).

6.

Planter boxes shall be installed on the roof terrace as specified on the site plan 0406-34-000.12 revision F and on section drawing 0406-34-400.01, and set back from the edge as shown. The balustrades for the roof terrace shall be set in from the roof edge as shown on drawing 0406-34-100.04 rev D. The roof terrace shall not be used until those planters and balustrades have been installed, and they shall be retained in those positions thereafter. Reason: To protect the privacy of flats in the adjoining wing of the same building, pursuant to Policy SADM30 (Design Principles) of the Hertsmere Local Plan: Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Plan 2016, and to ensure the safety of users of the roof terrace.

13.0 GENERAL REASONS FOR GRANTING PERMISSION This application has been granted because the proposed development is considered to be a sustainable development that would provide a decent standard of accommodation without causing any significant harm to neighbouring premises, to the public highway network, or to any other interests of acknowledged importance. Although the proposal did not initially comply with the Council’s policy to require 35% affordable housing, following negotiations the applicants have now agreed that six of the sixteen flats would indeed be affordable housing units, and this is to be controlled by a Section 106 planning obligation. 14.0 BACKGROUND PAPERS

1. The Planning application (18/2168/FUL) comprising application forms, certificate, drawings and any letters from the applicant in support of the application.

2. Replies from Statutory consultees and correspondence from third parties. 3. Any other individual document specifically referred to in the agenda report. 4. Published policies / guidance 15.0 INFORMATIVES 1.

The planning officer's report is available to view on the Council's website. It sets out in detail how the application has been considered.

2.

This development will involve the numbering of properties. The applicant must apply to the Borough Council's Street Naming and Numbering Section before any number or name is used. This is a requirement of the Public Health Act 1925 (sections 17-19) and Town Improvement Clauses Act 1847 (Section 64-65).

3.

This application has been approved. Since the application was submitted the Council has engaged in negotiations with the applicants' representatives on the subject of affordable housing provision, so as to avoid having to refuse planning permission, and the outcome of those negotiations has resulted in an acceptable proposal. The Council has acted positively and pro-actively in line with the requirements of the National Planning Policy Framework (paragraph 38) and in accordance with The Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2015.

4.

This application has been accompanied by a planning obligation as a Section 106 agreement in which the applicants have undertaken that 6 of the 16 flats are to be affordable housing units (discounted market rent units) comprising 6 x studio flats and 1 flat with two bedrooms.

5.

The applicant is advised that the storage of materials associated with the construction of this development should be provided within the site on land which is not public highway, and the use of such areas must not interfere with the public highway. If this is not possible, authorisation should be sought from the Highway Authority before construction works commence. Further information is available via the website https://www.hertfordshire.gov.uk/services/highways-roads-and-pavements/highwaysroads-and-pavements.aspx or by telephoning 0300 1234047.

16.0 CASE OFFICER Max Sanders, Senior Planning Officer e-mail address max.sanders@hertsmere.gov.uk