19/3409. 1-12E INC and 14A-18B INC The Elms, Nicoll Road, London, NW10 9AA
Decision Maker: Planning Committee
Decision status: Recommendations Approved
Is Key decision?: No
Is subject to call in?: No
PROPOSAL: Creation of 3 self-contained units involving the construction of a 4th floor level with terraces and balustrades above the residential block of flats known as Nos. 1-18B The Elms, Nicoll Road
RECOMMENDATION: To grantplanning permission subject to conditions as set out within the Committee reports.
That the Head of Planning be granted delegated authority to issue the planning permission and impose conditions and informatives to secure the matters as 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 nor that such change(s) could reasonably have led to a different decision having been reached by the Committee.
That the Committee confirms that adequate provision has been made, by the imposition of conditions, for the preservation or planting of trees as required by Section 197 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.
Mr Patrick Doyle (Principal Planning Officer) introduced the report and answered members’ questions. He referenced the supplementary report that corrected typographical errors in the main report and reiterated the recommendation for approval.
Mr Peter Graham objected to the application for a number of reasons including; excessive bulk, poor design, loss of daylight and sunlight, overlooking and loss of privacy, increased demand for parking, increased congestion and provision of inadequate drainage and refuse facilities. Mr Graham added that as the previously built 4th floor was not of brick construction, the existing building would not be able to sustain the proposal.
Mr Daniel James (agent) informed the Committee that the proposal would be set back 3.5metres to allow the floor to sit back and hence minimise impact. In responding to the objector’s claims, Mr James added that the building had significant capacity to take another storey and that the external materials for the previous extensions had been approved by the Council.
In response to members’ questions, Mr Doyle clarified that officers had recommended a wide scope of conditions within the main report that sought to address the concerns raised by the objectors to the application.
DECISION: Granted planning permission as recommended subject minor amendments as set out within the supplementary report.
(Voting was unanimous as follows: For 8, Against 0, Abstentions 0)
Wards Affected: Harlesden;
Publication date: 22/05/2020
Date of decision: 18/02/2020
Decided at meeting: 18/02/2020 - Planning Committee