“Unacceptable” plans for 176 flats on the site of a former waste transfer station have been rejected by a planning committee.

Watford Borough Council heard an application for the demolition of 12 Chalk Hill, the former Massey waste transfer station and an existing industrial building, adjacent to Bushey Arches, on Thursday.

In their place, developer Barion Homes wanted to build 176 flats, including ten one-bedroom flats and 166 two-bedroom flats, in four and five-storey blocks, with underground car parking, cycle storage and access from Chalk Hill.

Town Hall planning officers, however, labelled the plans “inappropriate” and “unacceptable”, which would harm the character of the area and the well-being of future occupants.

A report added: “The proposal fails to make provision for affordable housing or contributions towards the provision or improvement of sustainable transport, public open space, children's play space, community facilities or healthcare facilities.”

Previously, plans for 126 flats on the site had been rejected for 20 reasons in January 2008, while another application for 176 flats was rejected for 23 reasons in September 2008.

Leslie Gili-Ross, speaking for Architects Corporation on behalf of the developer, complained his client had only had one meeting with planning officers before the application reached the committee.

He said: “We have not had time to go through our reports in detail because it had to come to you. I ask this committee is it worth refusing this application and going to appeal when another four weeks of close consultation would have resolved all the problems.”

Oxhey ward councillor Tony Poole said local residents had been looking forward to seeing the site redeveloped.

He said: “What doesn't sit well is some of the objections that are listed in the officer's statement – the appearance, general design and access to the road. There is a general feeling that although a development would be welcome, it's a pity this development doesn't appear to come up to scratch.

“We certainly have a feeling for quality in this ward and I think we deserve something good. We want something of quality and why shouldn't we have it?”

After listening to both arguments, councillors unanimously refused planning permission for 16 reasons, including layout, size, noise impact, air quality, loss of privacy.

The application had also failed to meet the council's demand that 30 per cent of the accommodation be listed as affordable housing.

Councillor Rabi Martins said: “The problem I have with this is it appears this developer has disregarded a lot of guidance we offer and it ignores policy after policy.”

“It's a site that could be visually very attractive and appealing,” said Councillor Zoe McQuire.

“It should be developed in such a way that enhances the area rather than detracts from it. I would like to see this redeveloped in a much more sympathetic sense that it enhances that corner [of Bushey Arches].”

Councillor Ellie Burtenshaw added her concerns about the height of the proposed flats.

She said: “We might have to bite the bullet and bring down the number of units to get a better quality plan.”