croxley view / ascot road masterplanning study ... · croxley view / ascot road masterplanning...
TRANSCRIPT
Croxley View / Ascot Road Masterplanning Study draft supplementary planning document Statement in accordance with Regulation12 (a) of the Town and Country (Local Planning) (England) 2012
1
WATFORD BOROUGH COUNCIL
Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004
The Town & Country Planning (Local Planning) (England) Regulations 2012
Croxley View / Ascot Road Masterplanning Study
Supplementary Planning Document (SPD)
Consultation Statement
1.1 The Town and Country (Local Planning)(England) Regulations 2012 under Regulation 12(a) requires local planning authorities to prepare a statement, setting out:
i the persons the local planning authority consulted when preparing the supplementary planning document;
ii a summary of the main issues raised by those persons; iii how those issues have been addressed in the supplementary planning
document;
1.2 In accordance with this part, and Regulation 13 of the named regulations, the persons and organisations consulted as part of the process for preparing the Croxley View / Ascot Road Masterplanning Study supplementary planning document (SPD) are identified in Appendix A.
1.3 Public Consultation on the Draft SPD took place over six weeks from 18th August 2016 to 3rd October 2016.
1.4 Copies of the draft SPD were provided in Watford Library, North Watford Library and Watford Town Hall’s customer service centre. A press notice was issued in the Watford Observer on Friday 12th August 2016. Facebook and Twitter were also used to raise awareness of the draft SPG consultation. Details of the consultation can be found here:
https://watford.jdi-consult.net/localplan/
1.5 Appendix A lists details of all who were notified of the consultation.
1.6 Appendix B summarises the responses received, the key issues identified by the named consultees, and it explains how the council is addressing these issues.
Watford Junction draft supplementary planning document Statement in accordance with Regulation12 (a) of the Town and Country (Local Planning) (England) 2012
2 | P a g e
Appendix A – People / Organisations Consulted
The following list is of the 81 people or organisations who were sent consultation letters by post.
NAME
ORGANISATION
Estate Office Brasier Freeth LLP
Indigo Planning Ltd Indigo Planning Ltd
Ms Shirley Barlow Mrs Perline McFarlane Watford African Caribbean Association
Dr A G Saleh Watford Arabic School
Mr Greg Westover Legal & General Property
unknown
North Watford Church of the Nazerene
unknown Watford YMCA
Katherine Hill GL Hearn Limited
Mr Abraham D Hailey
Planning
Jones Lang LaSalle
Mrs C Daniels Cassiobury Infant and Nursery School
Mr M A Parker Draughtsman
Mr Leigh Hutchings Talking Newspaper
Mr Felix Augustin Waterfield Residents Association
Mr Alex O'Reilly Oceana/Woohoo Night Club
V Gurney Mr Richard Hunt
Mr Robert Caton Sherafae Taylor Mr J Koroma Hertfordshire African Association
Mr Norman Tyrwhitt Honary Freeman of the Borough
Mr Kevin Fontaine - Waldron Jehovah's Witnesses
Ms Janine Gordon Radlett Road Community Association
Mr Haji M Yaqoob Watford Mosque
Mr Henry Pryer Watford Rail Users' Group
Gemma Foster Barrat Homes
Mrs M Boon Mr S Woollatt Ellen Boyle Mr Adam Norton Primeplace Development Ltd
Mrs L Breach Mrs Carol Fisken Nick Tunley Mr Chris Taylor Leavesden Green Residents' Association
Mr Mohammed Aslam Khan Watford Muslim Elders Association
Unknown Unknown Unknown TFL Property Team
Ms Judith Kingsley Civil Aviation Civil Aviation
Watford Junction draft supplementary planning document Statement in accordance with Regulation12 (a) of the Town and Country (Local Planning) (England) 2012
3 | P a g e
Mrs Ann Edwards Mr John Baker Mr D K Burch Mrs Janet Burch Mr Mark Buxton Nick Guildford Terence O'Rourke
Mr Matthew Lard DLP LTD
Mr Geoffrey Simm Keay Homes Limited
Mrs Barbara Mott Suthergrey House Medical Centre
Mrs Karen Chase West Herts College
Miss S M Wood Mr Stroud Ms Joyce Bonnick Friends of Alban Wood
Inspector David Wheatley Hertfordshire Police
Mrs M T Woodcock Holyrood RC Infant School
Mr Andrew Ward RG+P
Mr Hemam Mistry Shree Prajapati Association
Halkin
Miss K Wetherell Mary Forsyth Mrs M Patterson K.A. Richardson Mrs Christine Betts Mr Steven Wiffen Ms Sheila Jordan Mrs Simmonds Mr Adam Wood Herts Prosperity
unknown
St Martins Church
Mr David Nicholls Wu Shu Kwan
Unknown Network Rail
Mrs PM Fabb Mr Thomas Carlisle R Navon
Mr John Sweeney Mr Arthur Pott
In addition to those letters that were sent by post (listed above) more than 500 notifications were
sent by e-mail. The following is a list of them, excluding internal e-mails to Council staff. To protect
the personal data of these consultees, parts of their e-mail addresses have been redacted.
jedplan@XXX;
Watford Junction draft supplementary planning document Statement in accordance with Regulation12 (a) of the Town and Country (Local Planning) (England) 2012
4 | P a g e
watford.ama@XXX;
peter.stephens@XXX;
peter.young7@XXX;
essemach@XXX ;
harveymotorcare@XXX;
dmiddlebrook@XXX;
roundaboutherts@XXX;
jarmanm@XXX;
n.garibaldi@XXX;
reidmary@XXX;
davidvcrees@XXX;
corrinreeves@XXX;
Watford Junction draft supplementary planning document Statement in accordance with Regulation12 (a) of the Town and Country (Local Planning) (England) 2012
5 | P a g e
sophielinington@XXX;
steve.j.fulton@XXX;
franmclark@XXX;
kevin.ocallaghanXX@XXX;
carolineharrisX@XXX;
beryl.burford@XXX;
sylviamoring@XXX;
robcramp@XXX;
tim.brooks@XXX;
renato.messere@XXX;
sercangXXX@XXX;
alex.mcdougallXXX@XXX;
tomparker@XXX;
jenny_thomas@XXX;
mikehooles@XXX;
vipul.kothiyal@XXX;
graham.carterXXX@XXX;
Watford Junction draft supplementary planning document Statement in accordance with Regulation12 (a) of the Town and Country (Local Planning) (England) 2012
6 | P a g e
robertmbolt@XXX;
XXX @bucksmeadow.co.uk;
XXX @fieldinfants.herts.sch.uk;
Watford Junction draft supplementary planning document Statement in accordance with Regulation12 (a) of the Town and Country (Local Planning) (England) 2012
7 | P a g e
sara_cook7@XXX;
alison.crofton@XXX;
gregor.mitchell@XXX;
roy.marshallX@XXX;
simon.milliken@XXX;
b.foxXX@XXX;
anne.rindl@XXX;
john.blundell@XXX;
bigboymick@XXX;
colin.barry@XXX;
rupert.thacker@XXX;
dglgplan@XXX;
watfordjack@XXX;
phil.moss@XXX;
Watford Junction draft supplementary planning document Statement in accordance with Regulation12 (a) of the Town and Country (Local Planning) (England) 2012
8 | P a g e
vankeena@XXX;
frankershaw@XXX;
peter.prosser@XXX;
kjpj@XXX;
liz.mayhew@XXX;
tdawork@XXX;
vwalsh@XXX;
oyeats@XXX;
gslane@XXX;
malcolm.dall@XXX;
Watford Junction draft supplementary planning document Statement in accordance with Regulation12 (a) of the Town and Country (Local Planning) (England) 2012
9 | P a g e
darolfe@XXX;
smithst.watford@XXX;
jwba68@XXX;
yasmin@XXX;
maz.e.lopez@XXX;
russells.export@XXX;
audreypeattie@XXX;
peterjeffree@XXX;
rowland.marshall@XXX;
Watford Junction draft supplementary planning document Statement in accordance with Regulation12 (a) of the Town and Country (Local Planning) (England) 2012
10 | P a g e
john.castleX@XXX;
bmwilcox9@XXX;
johnsonsXXX@XXX;
jennietXX@XXX;
joanna.chambersX@XXX;
gordonboogordon@XXX;
philip_chown@XXX;
sandraXX@XXX;
intyk@XXX;
pbak@XXX;
jjmalcolm@XXX;
vickimillward@XXX;
XXX @wakelin.co.uk;
XXX @affinitywater.co.uk;
Watford Junction draft supplementary planning document Statement in accordance with Regulation12 (a) of the Town and Country (Local Planning) (England) 2012
11 | P a g e
XXX @bidwells.co.uk;
colettebickham34@XXX ;
XXX @watford.camra.org.uk;
ianfvturner@XXX;
nigelagar452@XXX;
XXX @hca.gsi.gov.uk;
XXX @taylorwimpey.com;
vicaragevillage@XXX;
XXX @hertsvalleysccg.nhs.uk;
shopmobilitywatford@XXX;
brunijh@XXX;
martin.searle@XXX;
Watford Junction draft supplementary planning document Statement in accordance with Regulation12 (a) of the Town and Country (Local Planning) (England) 2012
12 | P a g e
mwood@XXX;
cllrbrandon@XXX;
kimscreationsuk@XXX;
caspanner@XXX;
richard_kavan@XXX;
hisgloryandpraise@XXX;
zoe_mowbray@XXX;
thisismartinhere@XXX;
dptmbr@XXX;
consultations@stratus- XXX.co.uk;
keneal.patel@XXX;
judithmoores@XXX;
ann_winkie@XXX;
naughtytadpole@XXX;
prowlandXX@XXX;
brennan_XX@XXX;
Watford Junction draft supplementary planning document Statement in accordance with Regulation12 (a) of the Town and Country (Local Planning) (England) 2012
13 | P a g e
XXXstewartmaps.co.uk;
eileen-cox@XXX;
stephenrmooreX@XXX;
kpambrose@XXX;
andrew_filer@XXX;
Watford Junction draft supplementary planning document Statement in accordance with Regulation12 (a) of the Town and Country (Local Planning) (England) 2012
14 | P a g e
sach.seyan@XXX;
anita.parry@XXX;
dglgplanning@XXX;
neil.bearspice@XXX;
distanXX@XXX;
trevor.mason@XXX;
kpsliu@XXX;
jaford@XXX;
emma.cornberg@XXX;
alan.luto4@XXXX;
XXX @cgms.co.uk;
m.meerabux@XXX;
XXX @stephengeorge.co.uk;
avi@XXX;
Watford Junction draft supplementary planning document Statement in accordance with Regulation12 (a) of the Town and Country (Local Planning) (England) 2012
15 | P a g e
richardah@XXX;
peak_j@XXX;
johnmarg@XXX;
corsetis@XXX;
paul.donovan@XXX;
patrick.mcloughlin@XXX;
Watford Junction draft supplementary planning document Statement in accordance with Regulation12 (a) of the Town and Country (Local Planning) (England) 2012
16 | P a g e
XXX @amec.com;
XXX @woolfbond.co.uk;
XXX @tfl.gov.uk;
andy.instone@ XXX;
XXX @dlpconsultants.co.uk;
XXX @tfl.gov.uk;
XXX @londonmidland.com;
XXX @naturalengland.org.uk;
tim.bracey@ XXX.com;
markreynolds262@ XXX.com;
john.britten@ XXX.com;
eoc@ XXX.com;
XXX @munden.co.uk;
stephanie.beardsworth@ XXX.com;
paultuffin@ XXX.com;
Watford Junction draft supplementary planning document Statement in accordance with Regulation12 (a) of the Town and Country (Local Planning) (England) 2012
17 | P a g e
XXX @dbschenker.com;
XXX @tfl.gov.uk;
hilary@rundell1. XXX ;
petra_klemm@ XXX;
davefish@ XXX.com;
stevecane65@ XXX.com;
bisherltd@ XXX.com;
XXX @wdsauk.co.uk;
XXX @tfl.gov.uk;
XXX @heronslea.net;
deniserees1@ XXX ;
mj2206@ XXX ;
marekbanasiak@ XXX ;
roundjanet@ XXX.co.uk;
tim.ludmila@ XXX.co.uk;
XXX @powerhausconsultancy.co.uk;
jane.evans@ XXX.co.uk;
XXX @alliance-plan.co.uk;
tina.batten@ XXX;
XXX @homecall.co.uk;
laura.wood@dacorum. XXX.uk;
XXX @herts.pnn.police.uk;
XXX @firstplan.co.uk;
XXX @montagu-evans.co.uk;
XXX @nlpplanning.com;
XXX @nlpplanning.com;
XXX @rapleys.co.uk;
Watford Junction draft supplementary planning document Statement in accordance with Regulation12 (a) of the Town and Country (Local Planning) (England) 2012
18 | P a g e
XXX @aldenham-pc.gov.uk;
bihca_herts@ XXX ;
XXX @cassioburyjm.herts.sch.uk;
XXX @central.herts.sch.uk;
XXX @chaterjm.herts.sch.uk;
XXX @chemistree.co.uk;
XXX @christhomasltd.co.uk;
XXX @ames-associates.co.uk;
XXX @environment-agency.gov.uk;
martin.hicks@ XXX. XXX.uk;
logan_rasiah@ XXX.com;
XXX @kingswood.herts.sch.uk;
sdavis@ XXX.co.uk;
XXX @monoconsultants.com;
XXX @naturalengland.org.uk;
XXX @naturalengland.org.uk;
gill1311@ XXX.co.uk;
XXX @intu.co.uk;
mdodds@ XXX.co.uk;
XXX @cbre.com;
XXX @stjames.co.uk;
XXX @bidwells.co.uk;
XXX @rg-p.co.uk;
XXX @argroup.co.uk;
XXX @tjxeurope.com;
michael.kirkwells@ XXX.com;
helenwright42@ XXX.com;
Watford Junction draft supplementary planning document Statement in accordance with Regulation12 (a) of the Town and Country (Local Planning) (England) 2012
19 | P a g e
XXX @londonmidland.com;
angela_duce@ XXX.co.uk;
jodal666@ XXX.com;
john.short07@ XXX.com;
nix_collins@ XXX.com;
speer304@ XXX.com;
lisa.cathro@ XXX. XXX.uk;
XXX @odysseymarkides.com;
owen_frith@ XXX.com;
adriana.pomella@ XXX.com;
XXX @rspb.org.uk;
XXX @nationalgrid.com;
XXX @busheyhallgarage.co.uk;
XXX @stwilliam.co.uk;
kevinsomerville@ XXX.com;
ted.maddex@ XXX.gov.uk;
beanbelinda@ XXX.com;
railwayterrace.association@ XXX.com;
dhordle@ XXX.com;
ianwilliams44@ XXX.co.uk;
kerrimc34@ XXX.com;
lizromek@ XXX.com;
michelle. XXX @networkrail.co.uk;
abraham. XXX @ingletonwood.co.uk;
tomotooleXX XXX.com;
XXX @foddyconsult.co.uk;
Watford Junction draft supplementary planning document Statement in accordance with Regulation12 (a) of the Town and Country (Local Planning) (England) 2012
20 | P a g e
stellaburns@ XXX.com;
jon. XXX @jdi-solutions.co.uk;
sacha. XXX - XXX @bnpparibas.com;
will. XXX @montagu-evans.co.uk;
XXX @albanwood.herts.sch.uk;
neil.levy@ XXX.gov.uk;
XXX @camra.org.uk;
chris. XXX @cgms.co.uk;
XXX @coatesway.herts.sch.uk;
daren.nathan@ XXX.co.uk;
david. XXX @ews-railway.co.uk;
bgkemp@ XXX.com;
brian.chisholm@ XXX.com;
graham.everett@ XXX.net;
mikemusk@ XXX.net;
XXX @goughcommercial.co.uk;
development. XXX @hertfordshire.gov.uk;
james. XXX @struttandparker.com;
jon. XXX @struttandparker.com;
matthew. XXX @valad.co.uk;
bharat. XXX @hertfordshire.nhs.uk;
ac.comserve@ XXX.com;
jaffer.bhimji1@ XXX.com;
XXX @lhaines.herts.sch.uk;
Watford Junction draft supplementary planning document Statement in accordance with Regulation12 (a) of the Town and Country (Local Planning) (England) 2012
21 | P a g e
XXX @marks-and-spencer.com;
ben. XXX @planware.co.uk;
XXX @rapleys.co.uk;
michael. XXX @rumballsedgwick.co.uk;
mheasman@ XXX.org;
s. XXX @welhat.gov.uk;
peter.shipp@XXX;
sliceforms@XXX;
edward.seamanXX@XXX;
rhodespropertycompanyXXX@XXX;
leolikaho@XXX;
thurlowbuckley@XXX;
simon.fowle@XXX;
tonymanfredini@XXX;
XXX@hertfordshire. XXX.uk;
noelcooperX@XXX;
d.brackfield@XXX;
Watford Junction draft supplementary planning document Statement in accordance with Regulation12 (a) of the Town and Country (Local Planning) (England) 2012
22 | P a g e
roccilife@XXX;
j_stockford@XXX;
mj.lawson@XXX;
richardreubin@XXX;
planning. XXX @3valleys.co.uk;
pinkyslatter@XXX;
bendiroj@XXX;
fulneyajr@XXX;
aagie@XXX;
tdatwork@XXX
Croxley View / Ascot Road Masterplanning Study draft supplementary planning document Statement in accordance with Regulation12 (a) of the Town and Country (Local Planning) (England) 2012
23 | P a g e
Appendix B: Summary of issues raised by the consultation and how they are to be addressed
In May 2016 the Croxley View / Ascot Road Masterplanning Study was produced, and it was published for consultation in August 2016. This
was a 14 page, A3 sized document which was produced for Watford Borough Council by consultants BDP. It consisted of a cover, a contents
page, one page of explanatory text, and 11 pages of plans or 3D block overviews. This was published for consultation as a preliminary study to
inform further work on a more detailed masterplan development brief.
This was published on the Council’s website and a public consultation on it was carried out for a six week period between Thursday 18th August
2016 and Monday 3rd October 2016. 27 representations were received.
The following table sets out a summary of the comments that were received, together with the Council’s response.
Points Raised Respondent Watford Council’s Response
Density / tall buildings This area is already over-populated. Too many new homes are proposed. Adding more development will result in a loss of open space and a loss of space for car parking. If any new homes are to be built here they should be low-rise houses, not blocks of flats. The number of new homes proposed (850) is excessive, some of the buildings are too tall (one would be 15 storeys) and the scheme is generally too dense. It will be a “concrete jungle”. This area is characterised by buildings of between two and four storeys, so buildings of 6 storeys, or of up to 15 storeys would be out of keeping. They might also block natural light to existing
Karasavvas 3000 Markham 3024 Gregory 3025 Spearman 3038 Gower 3032 Perry 3026 Chapman 3030 Gardner 3027 Gregory 3025 Wiggins 3022
The Watford Local Plan Part 1 was adopted in January 2013, following extensive public consultation and having been found “sound” by an independent Planning Inspector at an Examination in Public. It identified six Special Policy Areas in the borough for development or improvement, and the Western Gateway, of which this area forms a part, was one of those: SPA6. Its extent is shown in Figure 3 of the Local Plan: its width covers the Watford Business Park and this grass strip, its length is from the roundabout at the southern end of Whippendell Road to Tolpits Lane. The Watford Local Plan Part 1 is nearly five years old now, and the projected housing need figures that it included (260 new dwellings needed per year) is now out of date. A strategic housing market assessment (SCHMA) conducted in 2016 doubled that figure to 577
Croxley View / Ascot Road Masterplanning Study draft supplementary planning document Statement in accordance with Regulation12 (a) of the Town and Country (Local Planning) (England) 2012
24 | P a g e
homes.
Forsyth 855
per year. More recently in 2017 the government consulted on a draft standardised methodology for calculating housing need, which would produce a still higher figure of approximately 800 homes per year. Watford is a tightly constrained borough, with hardly any open land to expand onto, so efficient use must be made of any spare land. Building low density houses on this land would do little to meet the borough’s acute housing need.
The draft masterplan includes a plan marked with proposed building heights. The blocks that are shown to the north of the Morrisons supermarket are the tallest (6, 7, 8, 10 and 15 stories) because they are not close to existing dwellings, and because they would be closest to the proposed new station – the principle being that density should be greatest where it is closest to good public transport nodes such as stations. That part of the plan is out of date now because since the draft document was published for consultation a planning permission has been granted on that site, which includes a 24 storey tower (17/00048/FULM). The blocks that are shown on the grass strip are much lower, and their heights are determined by how close they would be to existing neighbouring dwellings: those at the southern end are the lowest at 3 storeys because they are the closest to neighbouring homes, while further north they would step up slightly to 4 or 6 storeys. These are not particularly tall by modern standards, making this a medium-density development.
Loss of wildlife, trees and open space This is open land with mature trees (some up to 45 years old) and wildlife such as foxes, rabbits, snakes, butterflies, grasshoppers, birds, badgers and small reptiles. The area should be left as it is for local people
Olliffe 2873 Gregory 3025 Harbron 3018 Picton 2984 Gregory 3025
The broad grass strip that is the subject of this masterplan is not designated as a park or a nature reserve, it is not Green Belt or woodland and there are no Tree Preservation Orders here. The reason why it stood empty and undeveloped for so long was that it was once safeguarded in a previous version of the local plan for the
Croxley View / Ascot Road Masterplanning Study draft supplementary planning document Statement in accordance with Regulation12 (a) of the Town and Country (Local Planning) (England) 2012
25 | P a g e
to enjoy as open green space. It is wrong to think that land is “unused” simply because nothing is built on it – green spaces are necessary as amenity space and as the “lungs” of a town.
Forsyth 855
building of a dual carriageway connecting West Watford to Tolpits Lane as a relief road. The first part of that dual carriageway was built: it is the modern section of Ascot Road, but the plan was abandoned in the 1990s, since when the empty land has had no purpose. It was always intended that this land be built upon – the difference is that now it is new homes that are planned to meet the needs of local people for housing, rather than a dual carriageway. The intention to develop this land for housing is not new and has never been a secret – it has been the adopted and published policy of Watford Council for the past 14 years or more. It is currently identified for this purpose in the Watford Local Plan Part 1 (adopted in 2013) Policy SPA6. Previously it was identified for housing development in the Watford District Plan 2000 (Policy IMR1, site RA3) which was adopted in 2003, and which stated that a Development Brief masterplan should be prepared. Unfortunately it has taken longer than we had hoped to commence work on that Development Brief, but the masterplan that is the subject of this consultation is the first step. The principle of developing this land for housing is established – the purpose of the consultation was to ask residents for their views on the particular design layout and scale that the draft masterplan envisages. This site is at the edge of Watford. Five minutes’ walk away, on the other side of Tolpits Lane, are open vistas over attractive countryside, and the tree-lined Ebury Way cycling and footpath, so there is no shortage of countryside nearby for residents to enjoy. Work has already commenced on the first phase of development, on site 53c (planning permission 16/01310/FULM, granted in Jan 2017) and it was a condition of that planning permission that the
Croxley View / Ascot Road Masterplanning Study draft supplementary planning document Statement in accordance with Regulation12 (a) of the Town and Country (Local Planning) (England) 2012
26 | P a g e
land be carefully surveyed first by qualified ecologists, who caught and then relocated the protected slow-worms that were living on the site. Badgers are a protected species; they are known to live nearby, though not on the site itself, and measures have also been taken to protect them, with the works being undertaken by qualified ecologists. A similar sensitive approach to the local ecology would be taken prior to any development taking place on the grass strip.
Other green open space exists nearby “There is plenty of green further up the Croxley View estate, which is spacious and is not overlooking over the great views of houses.”
Perry 3026
The Croxley View estate is indeed spacious, with plenty of green open space. The implication of this comment seems to be that new housing should be built elsewhere on the Croxley View estate, rather than on the disused land that is the subject of this masterplan. However the Council consider that the landscaped green areas of the estate benefit the character of the area and the amenity of residents of the estate; whereas the disused strip of land that is the subject of this masterplan has no purpose and was always intended to be built upon (originally it was safeguarded for the construction of a dual carriageway).
Healthy living The government wish to encourage the population to exercise more, but losing this open space will take away a valuable location for exercise. Local children play in the woods adjacent to Ebury Way, and should be allowed to continue.
Olliffe 2873
The proposals will not affect the woods adjacent to Ebury Way, as there are no proposals to build on that side of Tolpits Lane. The Ebury Way, which is only a few minutes’ walk away, is an attractive and tranquil cycle and footpath that will remain as it is, for joggers, cyclists, walkers and children to enjoy. King George V Playing Fields, with its sports pitches, tennis courts and running circuit, is located about ten minutes’ walk away.
Schools There are 5 or 6 schools in the area already, one of
Dizon 2897 Gower 3032
There is a shortage of school places in Watford already. If new homes are to be built here, the families who live in them will add to
Croxley View / Ascot Road Masterplanning Study draft supplementary planning document Statement in accordance with Regulation12 (a) of the Town and Country (Local Planning) (England) 2012
27 | P a g e
which has recently doubled its size. It is unnecessary to provide more. Cars picking up or dropping off children at these schools cause congestion and they erode verges by parking on them.
Gilett 2947 Hasson 2904 Chapman 3030 Wedzikowska 3002
that need – hence the need for a new primary school. The idea behind locating it in the heart of the new neighbourhood would be that the children and parents could walk to it, rather than having to drive to a school elsewhere.
Encroachment on Westfield Academy playing field One of the document’s plans shows potential locations for new schools, and that includes an indication that a new school might be built partly on land that is currently a corner of Westfield Academy’s playing fields. Sport England recognise that this document is at an early conceptual stage, but they are concerned about the loss of playing fields – particularly as some of the academy’s playing field has recently been lost when that school was rebuilt. They point out that they would be a statutory consultee on any application that proposed building on that land, and they recommend that the Council engage with them at an early stage about any such ideas.
Sport England 2354
There is already a new primary school to the north-east of Morrisons supermarket – the Ascot Road Community Free School, which opened in 2015. Site L1 on the draft masterplan suggests that it could be enlarged by building a new block on the asphalted playground. This new primary school shares the use of the adjacent Westfield Academy’s playing fields. The Council would wish to avoid building on the playing fields. This should be clarified in the masterplan.
Loss of children’s playground Concerns were raised about the loss of the existing children’s playground, which is a valued local facility – this is shown as being a possible site for a new primary school. Children also play on the open grassed area where the development is proposed. One objector is upset that the nearby Harwoods Recreation Ground is to be “knocked down” and she
Dizon 2897 Picton 2984 Peachey 2945 Picton 2984 Piercy 2921
The antepenultimate plan shows the area in which the existing playground is located as being a potential site for a new school. In that case the playground would have to be moved slightly. Plenty of green open space would remain, so it would simply be a matter of moving the playground a hundred metres or so to the east. The Harwoods Recreation Ground has not been knocked down, and there are no plans to do so. On the contrary, it has recently been refurbished, with a new adventure playground being installed to
Croxley View / Ascot Road Masterplanning Study draft supplementary planning document Statement in accordance with Regulation12 (a) of the Town and Country (Local Planning) (England) 2012
28 | P a g e
feels that this, plus the loss of the children’s playground on this site, will be a loss to local children.
replace the old equipment – that was opened in 2017.
Orion site (S1) at 6 Ascot Road The site that is labelled as S1 belongs to Orion (Cassiobridge) Ltd. They note that the document envisages 400 new dwellings on that site, but they consider that a more ambitious target should be set, given that the proposed new Cassiobridge Station nearby (part of the proposed Croxley Rail Link / Metropolitan Line Extension) will make it a sustainable location suitable for high density development provided that it is high quality. They agree that there should be active frontages on the ground floors adjacent to Ascot Road, with flats above. They note that one of the buildings shown on their site is 15 storeys tall – that being the tallest block that is proposed in the document. They consider that this is not ambitious enough, that this site should be considered a “gateway”, and that taller buildings would be appropriate on their site – particularly as that would mark the position of the new station, aiding legibility. The Council’s Skyline supplementary planning document mentions Ascot Road as being one of the few sites in Watford that could be suitable for tall buildings (section 3.5).
Orion (Cassiobridge) Ltd. 816
A year has passed between the consultation taking place and this summary table being issued; Watford Council apologise for the delay, which was a result of personnel changes and staff shortages. During that time Orion have applied for and been granted planning permission on this site: ref. 17/00048/FULM. That consented development includes a 24 storey tower (rather than 15 storeys as the draft masterplan had suggested) and 485 new homes, plus some retail space. Any new masterplan would refer to that planning permission and take account of it.
Land required during construction of the MLX Transport for London wrote to point out that they are
Transport for London 2980
When a more detailed masterplan development brief is worked up it should include a plan showing constraints including those areas
Croxley View / Ascot Road Masterplanning Study draft supplementary planning document Statement in accordance with Regulation12 (a) of the Town and Country (Local Planning) (England) 2012
29 | P a g e
due to start work as soon as possible on the construction of the Metropolitan Line Extension (MLX previously called the Croxley Rail Link). Some of the sites that the document has identified as potential development sites will be needed by TfL during construction of the MLX so they will not be available for other uses – at least not until that work has been completed. They are: PS1 – Has an emergency access through it (plot 63 from the Order plans). PS4 – Is land over which a new viaduct is to be built PS5, PS6 and PS7 – A transfer agreement has already been signed by which Herts County Council, who currently own this land, has agreed to its being transferred to TfL for use as a car park for the new Cassiobridge Station. It will therefore not be available for any other development.
that TfL have identified as necessary during construction of the MLX.
Old Ascot Road: proposed pedestrianisation If this area is pedestrianised, some limited access for vehicles would still be necessary for:
Servicing of Cassiobridge Station (rubbish collection, maintenance vehicles etc)
Staff parking
Emergency vehicles
A drop off area TfL worry that their maintenance costs might increase if vehicular access to the station is limited, and they would expect to be compensated for that. The MLX project must not be affected by any development
Transport for London 2980
The Council will keep TfL informed as more detailed plans are worked up. We are keen to ensure that the new Cassiobridge Station is a success, and liaison with TfL about any changes adjacent to the station will be essential. Minimising vehicle movements along the old Ascot Road would help create a more attractive environment for people using the station and the local community as well as supporting a new vibrant neighbourhood centre.
Croxley View / Ascot Road Masterplanning Study draft supplementary planning document Statement in accordance with Regulation12 (a) of the Town and Country (Local Planning) (England) 2012
30 | P a g e
proposals.
Hostel Some local residents have written about a proposal to build a 40-bed hostel on site 53c, which would serve the needs of people on the borough’s list of homeless people needing emergency accommodation. They feel that this is not the right location for such a facility because they fear that it would give rise to antisocial behaviour or crime.
Gower 3032 Picton 2984
This document does not actually include that proposal, but it seems that some confusion was caused locally because two separate Planning consultations were underway at the same time. While this draft master-planning study was being consulted upon by the Planning Policy Section, the Development Management Section were assessing an application for planning permission (ref. 16/01310/FULM) to build that hostel plus two other blocks of flats on the land that is labelled in this document as site 53c. A planning authority is obliged by law to consult neighbours when a planning application is received, and it so happened that it was received at the same time that the consultation was underway on this master-planning study. Some local residents seem to have confused the two consultations. That planning application was eventually approved in Jan 2017 and the hostel and the flats are currently being built. Anyone may suddenly find themselves homeless due to an unfortunate change in their circumstances – there is no reason to suppose that such people are necessarily “drug addicts, alcoholics and criminals” as one objector has written. The Council are obliged (most recently by the Homelessness Reduction Act 2017) to help local people who find themselves homeless. Clean, safe, well managed modern facilities are required to provide these unfortunate people with the accommodation that they need for themselves and their children.
Crime
There is a problem in this area already with anti-social behaviour, fly-tipping, violence and crime. A murder
Karasavvas 3000 Dizon 2897
There is no reason to suppose that anyone who moves into a new development will necessarily be a criminal, nor to suppose that all children will grow up to be delinquent teenagers. When the
Croxley View / Ascot Road Masterplanning Study draft supplementary planning document Statement in accordance with Regulation12 (a) of the Town and Country (Local Planning) (England) 2012
31 | P a g e
occurred nearby in 2015 and an arson attack in 2016. Adding further residents will make these problems worse. Any children who move into the new homes might grow up to be delinquent teenagers, join gangs and cause a nuisance.
Peachey 2945 Wedzikowska 3002 Picton 2984
Council assess any application for new housing one of the issues that is taken into account is whether the design will produce a safe environment, and the police are routinely consulted for advice on designing out opportunities for crime.
Tolpits Lane road junction The southern road junction, connecting with Tolpits Lane, would be dangerous as it would be close to a narrow bridge.
Gower 3032 This road junction has now been granted planning permission as part of the scheme that included the hostel and the 36 flats on site 53c (16/01310/FULM see above). Hertfordshire County Council, who are the Highways Authority, were consulted upon that application, and they concluded that the junction would be safe.
Car parking and traffic congestion Although modern developments tend to be designed to encourage the use of public transport, walking and cycling, people are never-the-less likely to own cars, and they are likely to want to park them nearby. This could cause parking congestion on local streets. It could also exacerbate traffic congestion in the area. Children could be endangered while crossing busy roads. What traffic studies have been done to assess the potential impact on the area of the new housing in terms of traffic congestion and environmental harm? One resident is disappointed that the scheme does not include more road linkages to connect the Watford and Croxley Business Parks with Tolpits Lane, Hagden Lane and Vicarage Road, to improve connections and relieve traffic congestion.
Gower 3032 Markham 3024 Gregory 3025 Piercy 2921 Spicer 983
If residents of the Croxley View estate would like a Controlled Parking Zone (for permit holders only) to be introduced to prevent others from parking on their streets, that could be arranged, subject to a consultation. The streets within the development area should be designed for slow-moving local traffic only (not as a cut through) and when these initial plans are worked up into a more detailed masterplan that should be specified. When a major application for planning permission is submitted the Council expect that it will be accompanied by a transport assessment, and the Council will then seek the views of Hertfordshire County Council who will review that assessment and provide advice on whether the proposal would be acceptable in terms of it highways impacts.
Croxley View / Ascot Road Masterplanning Study draft supplementary planning document Statement in accordance with Regulation12 (a) of the Town and Country (Local Planning) (England) 2012
32 | P a g e
Impact on the value of existing homes
The development might decrease the value of existing homes. Those homeowners should be compensated.
Perry 3026 Piercy 2921
Case law has established that this is not a material planning consideration.
Cycles, buggies and disability vehicles
Currently there is a smooth surfaced path, but the proposal would entail re-routing the cycle path, and this is likely to mean that kerbs would have to be negotiated.
Gower 3032 It should be a simple matter to install dropped kerbs where necessary.
Privacy The proposals would harm the privacy of existing residents.
Markham 3024 Gregory 3025 Perry 3026 Spearman 3038 Picton 2984
Any application for planning permission must take the reasonable protection of neighbours’ privacy into account.
Failure to consult Some residents responded to the Council’s consultation by complaining that there had been a failure to communicate with residents. One complained that he had only found out about the proposals when he received the consultation leaflet through his door asking for his views.
Gregory 3025 Beedom 2983
This consultation exercise was carried out as a way of communicating the Council’s ideas to local residents and included a display and leaflet handout event at Morrisons. The Holywell Residents Association distributed further copies of the Council’s consultation leaflet to residents.
Loss of a view
Some houses that currently face the open green area might lose the view that they enjoy.
Perry 3026
English case law determines what is, and what is not a “material planning consideration.” While the potential impact of a development on an outlook is a material consideration (e.g. if a proposal were to build directly outside the main window of a
Croxley View / Ascot Road Masterplanning Study draft supplementary planning document Statement in accordance with Regulation12 (a) of the Town and Country (Local Planning) (England) 2012
33 | P a g e
habitable room at close quarters that might be grounds for the refusal of planning permission), the impact on a view is not a material consideration. In other words, the courts have established there is no right to a view.
Housing should be built elsewhere, not here New housing should be built elsewhere – not on this land.
Gilett 2947 Perry 3026
The reason why the broad grass strip that is the subject of this masterplan stood empty and undeveloped for so long was that it was once safeguarded in a previous version of the Local Plan for the building of a dual carriageway connecting West Watford to Tolpits Lane as a relief road. The first part of that dual carriageway was built: it is the modern section of Ascot Road, but the plan was abandoned in the 1990s, since when the empty land has had no purpose. It was always intended that this land be built upon – the difference is that now it is new homes that are planned to meet the needs of local people for housing, rather than a dual carriageway. The intention to develop this land for housing is not new and has never been a secret – it has been the adopted and published policy of Watford Council for the past 14 years or more. It is currently identified for this purpose in the Watford Local Plan Part 1 (adopted in 2013) Policy SPA6. Previously it was identified for housing development in the Watford District Plan 2000 (Policy IMR1, site RA3) which was adopted in 2003, and which stated that a Development Brief masterplan should be prepared. Unfortunately it has taken longer than we had hoped to commence work on that Development Brief, but the masterplan that is the subject of this consultation is the first step. The principle of developing this land for housing is established – the purpose of the consultation was to ask residents for their views on the particular design layout and scale that the draft masterplan envisages. Watford is faced by a housing crisis that must be addressed urgently: the latest projections indicate that approximately 800
Croxley View / Ascot Road Masterplanning Study draft supplementary planning document Statement in accordance with Regulation12 (a) of the Town and Country (Local Planning) (England) 2012
34 | P a g e
new homes are needed every year in the borough, so the Council are reviewing any land that is standing empty and without a clear purpose, with a view to whether it would be appropriate for new housing. This is by no means the only site that is being considered for new housing in Watford.
History and archaeology Historic England write that there are no Historic Assets on the site but Cassio Bridge Lodge is a Grade II Listed Building to the north of the site, and any development nearby should respect its setting.
Historic England 3048
Cassiobridge Lodge at 67 Gade Avenue is indeed a Listed Building, but it is so far away from the site that its setting would not be significantly affected by the proposed developments. It is 363 metres from the site of the proposed tall tower in site S1, and most of the proposed housing (which would be considerably lower) would be at least 680 metres away on sites S3A-C.
Health & emergency services The additional residents will put pressure on health and emergency services.
Gower 3032 Piercy 2921
The Council will continue to work with the NHS Clinical Commissioning Board to identify areas where new GP surgeries are needed. If one is considered necessary in this development it could be included. The Police are routinely consulted on all major planning applications to ensure that they are satisfied that the streets are designed with their needs in mind.
Disturbance during works There would be disturbance caused to residents during the works, and these could continue for a long time. Dust arising from the works could affect the breathing of residents.
Gardner 3027 The Council’s Environmental Health service have powers to take action against building sites that are causing persistent and unreasonable disturbance, or which are threatening public health. The fact that construction work can cause some inconvenience while it is underway is not a valid reason for preventing development because otherwise hardly anything could ever be built.
Discrimination One resident notes that the buildings proposed at the southern end would be only 3 storeys, but those
Wiggins 3022 Wright 2880
The heights of the blocks are determined by how close they would be to existing neighbouring dwellings: those at the southern end are the lowest at 3 storeys because they are the closest to
Croxley View / Ascot Road Masterplanning Study draft supplementary planning document Statement in accordance with Regulation12 (a) of the Town and Country (Local Planning) (England) 2012
35 | P a g e
outside his own home are shown as 6 storeys, and he suspects that the reason is that the former is near private housing whereas the latter is near affordable housing. He feels that this is discriminatory. Another writes that: “the estate should not be viewed as an easy answer to the town’s housing issues simply because of the social status of its residents.”
neighbouring homes, while further north they would step up slightly to 4 or 6 storeys. This has nothing to do with the tenure (i.e. whether they are privately owned or not) of the neighbouring properties.
Immigration The government is to blame for the housing crisis because they have allowed uncontrolled immigration. It is unfair to penalise existing residents by building new homes in their vicinity when the housing shortage was caused by a failure of government policy.
Wiggins 3022
Issues such as the UK’s membership of the European Union and national policies on immigration are outside the purview of this study. Every local planning authority is obliged to plan for new housing to meet the objectively assessed need for its area over at least the next five years. The reasons for the pressure on housing are beside the point.
Croxley View / Ascot Road Masterplanning Study draft supplementary planning document Statement in accordance with Regulation12 (a) of the Town and Country (Local Planning) (England) 2012
36 | P a g e
Appendix C: Front cover of the document that was consulted upon