Decision details

19/2408 111-115 Salusbury Road, London, NW6 6RG

Decision Maker: Planning Committee

Decision status: Recommendations Approved

Is Key decision?: No

Is subject to call in?: No

Decisions:

PROPOSAL: Erection of a fourth and fifth storey over existing three-storey office building to create 8 self-contained flats (comprising 6 No. 2-bedroom and 2 No. 3-bedroom flats) with associated new street level entrance to the front and secondary entrance to the side, new lift and stairs along with glazed link bridge, amendments to car parking arrangements and provision for refuse and cycle stores to the rear.

 

RECOMMENDATION: That the Head of Planning be granted delegated authority to issue the planning permission and impose conditions and informatives 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, 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.

 

Mr Damian Manhertz (Development Management Team Leader) introduced the report summarising the key aspects of the application as set out within the main report and answered Members’ questions.

 

Ms Tania Spooner (in remote attendance) objected to the application, raising several issues including the following:

·         The proposal will have an unacceptable impact on residential amenity in terms of loss of privacy, outlook and light, contrary to the Council’s Policy DPM1.

·         The development will have a noticeable impact on two flats within 105-109 Salusbury Road in terms of loss of daylight and sunlight, essentially rendering them dark and dismal.

·         The development does not meet the Council’s supplementary planning guidance which requires a minimum separation distance of 18m between habitable rooms and 9m for outdoor space and inappropriate development.

·         The Council’s decision to grant planning permission for this proposal in 2016 was clearly entirely irrational for the above reasons and should not be repeated simply for the sake of consistency.

 

Mr Will Kumar (agent, in remote attendance) informed the Committee that the application was for a renewal of planning permission granted in 2016 and addressed the concerns that objectors had raised.  Officers considered acceptable the daylight and sunlight report as it would have a minimal impact on neighbouring properties.

 

In discussing the application, Members clustered the issues raised including the following; changes to policies since the expiry of the extant consent; consultation; daylight and sunlight; impact on residential amenities and the nearby cemetery.  Members noted the following responses that the Team Manager submitted:

·         The design guidance had been updated but would not affect the recommendation for approval.

·         The consultation carried out complied with statutory requirement.

·         That while there would be a significant loss of day light to some adjoining flats, much of the impacts is associated with the over-hanging elements of the adjoining building and the impacts would be considerably lower when these elements were excluded from the analysis in line with BRE guidance.

 

With no further issues raised and having established that all members had followed the discussions, the Chair asked members to vote on the recommendation.  Members voted by majority decision to approve the application as recommended.

 

DECISION: Granted planning permission as recommended.

(Voting was recorded as follows:  For 5; Against 1; Abstention 2).

Wards Affected: Queens Park;

Publication date: 23/07/2020

Date of decision: 24/06/2020

Decided at meeting: 24/06/2020 - Planning Committee

Accompanying Documents: