Colne Valley Strategic Development Area

Showing comments and forms 1 to 4 of 4

Comment

Watford Final Draft Local Plan 2018-2036

Representation ID: 1803

Received: 17/02/2021

Respondent: Mr John Snell

Representation Summary:

This comment is made in the context of the Colne Area but has a wider application. Thomas Sawyer Way has to be the most expensive and least cost-effective road built in Watford in living memory: it is a cul-de-sac only giving access to the hospital --- laudable but poor value. It should be extended so that a connection is made to the Ricky Road near the Premier Inn (via Croxley estate). This would relieve several roads around the town centre, with significant savings in time and journey costs. At a minimum, provide all turning movements at junction with Wiggenhall Road

Comment

Watford Final Draft Local Plan 2018-2036

Representation ID: 1899

Received: 18/03/2021

Respondent: La Salle Investment Management

Agent: Montagu Evans LLP

Representation Summary:

In relation to building heights, the supporting text to Policy CDA2.3 stipulates that the base future building height in the area is 5 storeys. This however contradicts 'Policy QD6.5-Building Height' which confirms a base building height of up to 6 storeys in the Colne Valley Strategic Development Area, and we therefore suggest Policy CDA2.3 is updated to reflect heights up to 6 storeys.

Development of the wider area is likely to come forward in phases depending on landownership. The policy should recognise and consider the deliverability and future phasing of development coming forward in the area over the Plan period.

Attachments:

Comment

Watford Final Draft Local Plan 2018-2036

Representation ID: 2112

Received: 18/03/2021

Respondent: Hertfordshire County Council

Agent: Hertfordshire County Council

Representation Summary:

5.23 Transport. The vision to transform this from a car dominated environment to a new mixed used quarter is supported but may be challenging to achieve, as it is traversed by a number of key vehicular routes into the town centre which divide the area into different sections. There are a wide variety of land uses within the area which again will be a challenge to its coherence as a defined quarter. It is noted that this is a diverse area which contains large developments in the River Colne area where masterplans have yet to be developed.
Watford Riverwell, Vicarage Road Football Stadium and Watford General Hospital area (Paragraph 2.68)
5.24 Transport. Safeguarding of the former Metropolitan Line Extension route is strongly supported.

Comment

Watford Final Draft Local Plan 2018-2036

Representation ID: 2113

Received: 18/03/2021

Respondent: Hertfordshire County Council

Agent: Hertfordshire County Council

Representation Summary:

5.25 Children’s Services: (School Place Planning). The text included in this paragraph (and repeated in paragraph. 10.11 of the local plan) states that: “For sites larger than 1,000 dwellings, education provision will be required on site’. However, in paragraph. 2.19 (and also repeated in different parts of the plan) the following comment leaves the possibility for developers to seek a solution away from the strategic development areas of Watford Junction, Town Centre and Colne Valley Retail, while being supported by the Local Planning Authority (LPA): ‘If an alternative location for a new primary school is identified outside of the Strategic Development Area and will meet the needs of new residents this will be supported’. The two requirements appear to contradict to each other, and this approach should be clarified as the overall quantum of primary school provision in the plan is already under pressure.
5.26 Paragraph 2.70 further suggests that “For sites that are located in close proximity to each other and will have a cumulative impact that will generate demand for a new school, applicants are encouraged to work collaboratively with other landowners and the education authority to best meet this need. There is a need to identify where a new primary school can be provided that provides good amenity for young children.” This does not seem to deal with the demand for primary education provision rather than a mere ‘encouragement’ for developers to find a solution.