Contentious proposals to build more than 50 new homes on a cramped Garston estate recommended for approval

Contentious proposals to build more than 50 new homes on a cramped Garston estate recommended for approval

Contentious proposals to build more than 50 new homes on a cramped Garston estate recommended for approval

First published in News Watford Observer: Photograph of the Author by , Chief Reporter

Contentious proposals to build more than 50 new homes on a cramped Garston estate have been recommended for approval.

Watford Council planners have urged politicians should vote through Watford Community Housing Trust’s plans to expand the Boundary Way estate.

The recommendation was made in the face of strong opposition from residents to the application for 56 new one, two, and three bedroom homes.

People in the area have described the scheme as "back-to-back concrete" and looking "East German and Russian".

The plans are set to go before Watford Council’s development control committee on Thursday.

Designs show the trust aims to demolish two blocks of flats and a shop as well as 15 rows of lock-up garages to make way for the new homes.

In its place will be a new "community facility" 55 new homes in two and three-storey buildings, two play areas will be revamped and a community garden created.

The trust is also promising to create open parking courts and on-street parking bays created as well as undertaking new landscaping for the estate.

In a report to the committee, planners said: "The proposal will achieve significant improvements to the layout and appearance of the site with the removal of poorly sited lock-up garages and the creation of open, landscaped parking courts."

The report said the estate is sat on the boundary of Three Rivers and Watford councils and if the committee does approve the plan the trust will still have to gain permission from Three Rives.

Since the council’s transferred their housing stock to private housing associations, around 35 per cent of the estate comes under the Watford Community Housing Trust and the rest is under Thrive.

The report added that the ownership is further complicated by the fact that the garage blocks on the west of the estate have remained in the ownership of Three Rivers District Council whilst those in the eastern part were transferred to Watford Community Housing Trust.  

Planners said they would be seeking contributions from the trust of around £90,000 if the project went ahead for things such as education, youth facilities and libraries.

Councillors on the committee were urged to vote in favour of the plans, with officers saying the plans would improve the appearance and layout of the estate.

The report added: "The central area of the site will also be rejuvenated with new dwellings and a new shop, community facility and community garden with improved accessibility to form a new focus to the estate."

 

Comments (15)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

7:22pm Tue 26 Aug 14

gusgreen says...

Not MORE BLOODY houses in Watford

How about having LESS BLOODY PEOPLE

And whilst we are about it less stupid politicians
Not MORE BLOODY houses in Watford How about having LESS BLOODY PEOPLE And whilst we are about it less stupid politicians gusgreen
  • Score: 16

8:15pm Tue 26 Aug 14

Cuetip says...

Why is there an arrogant assumption that residents don't know what they are talking about and they should accept double standards ie in some areas people should live like sardines?

Surely we should aim to enhance the living experience for residents and the generations to come.

£90,000 seems a rather silly amount for the short / long term disruption as well as consequences of such a development eg how many metres of pavement can be repaired?
Why is there an arrogant assumption that residents don't know what they are talking about and they should accept double standards ie in some areas people should live like sardines? Surely we should aim to enhance the living experience for residents and the generations to come. £90,000 seems a rather silly amount for the short / long term disruption as well as consequences of such a development eg how many metres of pavement can be repaired? Cuetip
  • Score: 9

11:30pm Tue 26 Aug 14

Andrew1963 says...

Good decision, we don't want all this development in Oxhey.
Good decision, we don't want all this development in Oxhey. Andrew1963
  • Score: 0

12:38am Wed 27 Aug 14

LSC says...

What the crivens is a 'Parking Court'? And how do you landscape one? IT'S A CAR PARK and no amount of blue-sky-thinking and running-up-flagpoles and singing-from-the-sam
e-songsheet and all the other management bull****-bingo is going to hide the fact.

"The trust is also promising to create open parking courts".
Makes it sound like a garden fete.

"In a report to the committee, planners said: "The proposal will achieve significant improvements to the layout and appearance of the site with the removal of poorly sited lock-up garages and the creation of open, landscaped parking courts.""

I'd recommend a visitor centre at this rate, does the Tourist Board know yet? Who wouldn't want to see 56 new rabbit hutches with a car park with a bush in it that someone will set fire to within a week?
What the crivens is a 'Parking Court'? And how do you landscape one? IT'S A CAR PARK and no amount of blue-sky-thinking and running-up-flagpoles and singing-from-the-sam e-songsheet and all the other management bull****-bingo is going to hide the fact. "The trust is also promising to create open parking courts". Makes it sound like a garden fete. "In a report to the committee, planners said: "The proposal will achieve significant improvements to the layout and appearance of the site with the removal of poorly sited lock-up garages and the creation of open, landscaped parking courts."" I'd recommend a visitor centre at this rate, does the Tourist Board know yet? Who wouldn't want to see 56 new rabbit hutches with a car park with a bush in it that someone will set fire to within a week? LSC
  • Score: 11

10:04am Wed 27 Aug 14

LocalBoy1 says...

Well, you can't make the Boundary Way estate look any worse, council estate style housing at it's worst. Maybe this new project will improve the appearance of the area, who knows??
Well, you can't make the Boundary Way estate look any worse, council estate style housing at it's worst. Maybe this new project will improve the appearance of the area, who knows?? LocalBoy1
  • Score: 4

5:49pm Wed 27 Aug 14

D_Penn says...

This is not about improving the look of the area. This is about squeezing in more homes. The peddled rubbish about the new plans making the area look better is just a smokescreen to hide the truth.

Of course, the residents can see the plans for what they are and that's why they are fighting them, but, as ever, seem to be getting short shrift.

It's disgusting that people living in an area are so often ignored and have their wishes steam-rollered into the mud by high-earning suits who rarely live anywhere near the zone that's the focus of their area wrecking ball philosophy of more flats, more flats, more flats.

This town needs a top to bottom change of management.
This is not about improving the look of the area. This is about squeezing in more homes. The peddled rubbish about the new plans making the area look better is just a smokescreen to hide the truth. Of course, the residents can see the plans for what they are and that's why they are fighting them, but, as ever, seem to be getting short shrift. It's disgusting that people living in an area are so often ignored and have their wishes steam-rollered into the mud by high-earning suits who rarely live anywhere near the zone that's the focus of their area wrecking ball philosophy of more flats, more flats, more flats. This town needs a top to bottom change of management. D_Penn
  • Score: 0

7:39pm Wed 27 Aug 14

Cuthbert007 says...

What I would like say is we needing good housing and uk very good at providing for all people but we need more house as more people living uk. Very happy for this hapenning. Thank you alot.
What I would like say is we needing good housing and uk very good at providing for all people but we need more house as more people living uk. Very happy for this hapenning. Thank you alot. Cuthbert007
  • Score: 0

7:46pm Wed 27 Aug 14

Cuthbert007 says...

gusgreen wrote:
Not MORE BLOODY houses in Watford

How about having LESS BLOODY PEOPLE

And whilst we are about it less stupid politicians
More people living uk so obvious we need more house to live in. Be happy for it to happen and all can have oportunity to live council houses. We have small flat on part private rent as not enough houses for all so oportunity to move here and larger family area.
[quote][p][bold]gusgreen[/bold] wrote: Not MORE BLOODY houses in Watford How about having LESS BLOODY PEOPLE And whilst we are about it less stupid politicians[/p][/quote]More people living uk so obvious we need more house to live in. Be happy for it to happen and all can have oportunity to live council houses. We have small flat on part private rent as not enough houses for all so oportunity to move here and larger family area. Cuthbert007
  • Score: 1

8:35pm Wed 27 Aug 14

D_Penn says...

That more homes are needed is undeniable, but here's the question.

Why are we building new dwellings in the most densely packed part of one of the most densely packed towns in the most densely packed country in Europe?

It's clear that cramming more people into an overcrowded area amonts to gross mismanagement which reduces everyone's quality of life.

Britain desperately needs new towns with decent, open spaces and good sized homes, not the battery-farmed people crates which are appearing all over Watford.
That more homes are needed is undeniable, but here's the question. Why are we building new dwellings in the most densely packed part of one of the most densely packed towns in the most densely packed country in Europe? It's clear that cramming more people into an overcrowded area amonts to gross mismanagement which reduces everyone's quality of life. Britain desperately needs new towns with decent, open spaces and good sized homes, not the battery-farmed people crates which are appearing all over Watford. D_Penn
  • Score: 0

9:51pm Wed 27 Aug 14

Stewbyhorn1 says...

Unfortunately 90% of the council houses we're sold off years ago by the council so now they're trying to rectify the problem. Boundary Way is poorly designed but it was built for purpose back in the day, a new site has to be found for new affordable housing
Unfortunately 90% of the council houses we're sold off years ago by the council so now they're trying to rectify the problem. Boundary Way is poorly designed but it was built for purpose back in the day, a new site has to be found for new affordable housing Stewbyhorn1
  • Score: 5

11:39pm Wed 27 Aug 14

Cuthbert007 says...

D_Penn wrote:
That more homes are needed is undeniable, but here's the question.

Why are we building new dwellings in the most densely packed part of one of the most densely packed towns in the most densely packed country in Europe?

It's clear that cramming more people into an overcrowded area amonts to gross mismanagement which reduces everyone's quality of life.

Britain desperately needs new towns with decent, open spaces and good sized homes, not the battery-farmed people crates which are appearing all over Watford.
We have a right to live at watford why we should move another area. Area nice school good doctor dentist very good
[quote][p][bold]D_Penn[/bold] wrote: That more homes are needed is undeniable, but here's the question. Why are we building new dwellings in the most densely packed part of one of the most densely packed towns in the most densely packed country in Europe? It's clear that cramming more people into an overcrowded area amonts to gross mismanagement which reduces everyone's quality of life. Britain desperately needs new towns with decent, open spaces and good sized homes, not the battery-farmed people crates which are appearing all over Watford.[/p][/quote]We have a right to live at watford why we should move another area. Area nice school good doctor dentist very good Cuthbert007
  • Score: -1

11:42pm Wed 27 Aug 14

Cuthbert007 says...

D_Penn wrote:
That more homes are needed is undeniable, but here's the question.

Why are we building new dwellings in the most densely packed part of one of the most densely packed towns in the most densely packed country in Europe?

It's clear that cramming more people into an overcrowded area amonts to gross mismanagement which reduces everyone's quality of life.

Britain desperately needs new towns with decent, open spaces and good sized homes, not the battery-farmed people crates which are appearing all over Watford.
You are wrong. We have right live in watford
[quote][p][bold]D_Penn[/bold] wrote: That more homes are needed is undeniable, but here's the question. Why are we building new dwellings in the most densely packed part of one of the most densely packed towns in the most densely packed country in Europe? It's clear that cramming more people into an overcrowded area amonts to gross mismanagement which reduces everyone's quality of life. Britain desperately needs new towns with decent, open spaces and good sized homes, not the battery-farmed people crates which are appearing all over Watford.[/p][/quote]You are wrong. We have right live in watford Cuthbert007
  • Score: -1

1:06am Thu 28 Aug 14

D_Penn says...

@Cuthbert007

For pretty obvious reasons, there is no law that says just because somebody wants to live in a specific area that a home has got to be built there for them to live in. So I'm sorry, but I must correct your misconception. Nobody has a 'right' to demand that they are able to live in a town of their choosing.
@Cuthbert007 For pretty obvious reasons, there is no law that says just because somebody wants to live in a specific area that a home has got to be built there for them to live in. So I'm sorry, but I must correct your misconception. Nobody has a 'right' to demand that they are able to live in a town of their choosing. D_Penn
  • Score: 3

7:53am Thu 28 Aug 14

Cuthbert007 says...

D_Penn wrote:
@Cuthbert007

For pretty obvious reasons, there is no law that says just because somebody wants to live in a specific area that a home has got to be built there for them to live in. So I'm sorry, but I must correct your misconception. Nobody has a 'right' to demand that they are able to live in a town of their choosing.
What law is this. What about a human right to live there
[quote][p][bold]D_Penn[/bold] wrote: @Cuthbert007 For pretty obvious reasons, there is no law that says just because somebody wants to live in a specific area that a home has got to be built there for them to live in. So I'm sorry, but I must correct your misconception. Nobody has a 'right' to demand that they are able to live in a town of their choosing.[/p][/quote]What law is this. What about a human right to live there Cuthbert007
  • Score: -3

10:18am Thu 28 Aug 14

D_Penn says...

@cuthbert007

You are trying to invent a human right that doesn't exist.

People cannot just demand to live where they want because demand for space in popular areas always outstrips supply. If there were no restrictions then overcrowding would make life intolerable for all living there, including new arrivals.

If you are thinking about human rights you should also factor in the welfare of people already living in an area having a need for a decent amount of living space and not having it compromised by thoughtless overdevelopment like we have seen all over Watford.

That is why the people who live on the Garston estate are fighting the new development proposals. They are right to do so.
@cuthbert007 You are trying to invent a human right that doesn't exist. People cannot just demand to live where they want because demand for space in popular areas always outstrips supply. If there were no restrictions then overcrowding would make life intolerable for all living there, including new arrivals. If you are thinking about human rights you should also factor in the welfare of people already living in an area having a need for a decent amount of living space and not having it compromised by thoughtless overdevelopment like we have seen all over Watford. That is why the people who live on the Garston estate are fighting the new development proposals. They are right to do so. D_Penn
  • Score: 4
Post a comment

Remember you are personally responsible for what you post on this site and must abide by our site terms. Do not post anything that is false, abusive or malicious. If you wish to complain, please use the ‘report this post’ link.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree