Decision details

18/3591. 5A-G Inc, Exeter Road, London, NW2 4SJ

Decision Maker: Planning Committee

Decision status: Recommendations Approved

Is Key decision?: No

Is subject to call in?: No

Decisions:

PROPOSAL: Demolition of existing rear extension and construction of a single storey ground floor rear extension and excavation to create a basement level to facilitate the conversion of the 3 existing ground floor self-contained flats into 3 x self-contained duplex flats at ground and lower ground floor level; new front boundary wall and new entrance gates; lowering of the ground level to side and rear; rear terraces with metal railings; new side entrance door; new windows to side elevation; new lightwell to front garden; felling of rear garden trees (ash tree T1 and a small group of sycamores G2) and replacement tree planting, subdivision of the rear garden, cycle/waste storage and associated landscaping.

 

RECOMMENDATION: To grant planning permission subject to the conditions set out within the Committee reports.

 

That the Head of Planning be granted delegated authority to issue the planning permission and impose conditions to secure the matters set out within the Committee reports.

 

That the Head of Planning be granted delegated authority to make changes to the wording of the Committee’s decision (such as to delete, vary or add conditions, informatives, planning obligations or reasons for the decision) prior to the decision being actioned, provided that the Head of Planning is satisfied that any such changes could not reasonably be regarded as deviating from the overall principle of the decision reached by the Committee not that such change(s) could reasonably have led to a different decision having been reached by the Committee.

 

Mr Sean Newton (Principal Planning Officer) introduced the report and answered members’ questions.  In reference to the supplementary report, he drew Members’ attention to the additional objections received and officers’ responses to them, minor typographical error as set out within the supplementary report and reiterated the recommendation for approval.

 

Ms Donna Giles objected to the application for several reasons including the following; potential flooding, damage to the foundations of her property difficulties selling her flat in the future, impacts of her health and impact on the character of the Conservation area, which could set a precedent for similar developments in the area.

 

Mr Paul Handley also objected for a number of reasons including the following; lack of preparatory site specific hydrological investigations, the need for a detailed construction management plan and structural statement which would respect the high risk shallow foundations of local properties and thus seek to prevent structural damage to nearby local properties, that the Council should require party wall agreements to be entered into and substantial security deposits.  Mr Handley referenced the basement policies of Camden Council, Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea and Westminster City Council as best practices and requested the Committee to consider adopting the basement policies of those boroughs.

 

Mr Michael Doyle (agent) addressed the Committee and answered Members’ questions. He submitted that the proposal, which complied with London Standards and the National Policy Framework on Basements, would improve the appearance of the current derelict building.  He drew Members’ attention to the recommended condition for Construction Management Plan to ensure the minimum construction impact.  He assured Members that the applicant would continue to engage with neighbours and the Council’s building regulation on the scheme.

 

In response to members’ questions, Mr Newton submitted that Officers had tested Brent’s basement policy against National Framework at a public inquiry and found to be sound. He added that the site was not within a flood risk area and that the structural integrity of adjoining properties were outside of the planning regime. 

 

Members were minded to grant planning permission as recommended with the exception of Councillors S Butt and Maurice who dissented due to potential impact on nearby properties.

 

DECISION: Granted planning permission as recommended.

(Voting was recorded as follows: For 6, Against 2, Abstention 0).

Wards Affected: Mapesbury;

Publication date: 22/05/2020

Date of decision: 18/02/2020

Decided at meeting: 18/02/2020 - Planning Committee

Accompanying Documents: