Agenda and draft minutes
Venue: Grand Hall - Brent Civic Centre, Engineers Way, Wembley, HA9 0FJ. View directions
Contact: Joe Kwateng, Governance Officer 020 8937 1354; Email: joe.kwateng@brent.gov.uk
No. | Item |
---|---|
Declarations of personal and prejudicial interests Members are invited to declare at this stage of the meeting, any relevant personal and prejudicial interests and discloseable pecuniary interests in any matter to be considered at this meeting. Minutes: Car Parking Spaces, 181-189 East Lane, Wembley Councillor Daly declared that as she had previously expressed her objections to the application, she would withdraw from the meeting room during consideration of the application.
Approaches.
Minavil House, Rosemont Road, Wembley All members and officers received a brochure from the applicant’s agents. |
|
Minutes of the previous meeting PDF 91 KB Minutes: RESOLVED:-
that the minutes of the previous meeting held on 26 April 2017 be approved as an accurate record of the meeting. |
|
16-2629 Minavil House, Rosemont Road, Wembley, HA0 4PZ PDF 538 KB Additional documents: Minutes: PROPOSAL: Demolition of existing two storey commercial buildings and erection of a mixed used development ranging from ten to twenty six storeys in height, comprising 251 residential flats (83 x 1bed, 136 x 2bed and 32 x 3bed), 1,942 sqm retail foodstore (Use class A1) on the ground floor, 622sqm of office space (Use Class B1) on the first floor, 634sqm retail floorspace for flexible use as café bar or restaurant (Use class A1, A4 or A3) at lower ground floor and ground floor level; together with associated vehicular access, car and cycle parking spaces, bin stores, plant room, landscaping and private and communal amenity space.
RECOMMENDATION: Grant planning permission, subject to the Stage 2 referral to the Mayor of London, and subject to the completion of a satisfactory Section 106 or other legal agreement to secure the Heads of Terms, delegate authority to the Head of Planning to issue the planning permission and Impose conditions (and informatives) to secure the matters set out in the report.
That the Head of Planning is delegated authority to make changes to the wording of the committee’s decision (such as to delete, vary or add conditions, informatives) 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
David Glover (Deputy Area Planning Manager) introduced the scheme and answered members’ questions. In reference to the supplementary report he corrected the affordable housing to be provided by either Genesis or another Registered Provider and also amended the Section 106 agreement to reflect a minimum of 32 affordable units and 194 intermediate units. He advised members that a replacement tree would be planted.
Andrew Linnie in objection stated that although he supported the principle of the development, he expressed concerns on behalf of the residents in the development to the south of the site regarding the scheme’s scale, massing, height and obstruction to light.
Peter Mahoney (applicant) spoke in support of his application and answered members’ questions. He added that the proposed development which would offer 251 new homes with affordable and intermediate units and commercial units would assist in the regeneration of the Alperton Growth Area.
In responding to issues raised, David Glover informed members that the separation between the proposed development and existing buildings exceeded minimum distances and thus privacy for neighbouring residents would not be an issue. He added that the layout and design were also acceptable. In reiterating the recommendation, he drew members’ attention to the amendments as set out in the supplementary report.
DECISION: Granted planning permission as recommended, with amendments to the Heads of Terms to refer to a minimum of 32 Affordable Rent and 194 Intermediate units and to Genesis or other Registered Provider approved by the Council. (Voting was unanimous) |
|
Minutes: PROPOSAL: Demolition of existing buildings at Abbey Wharf, Delta Centre and all of 152 Mount Pleasant and redevelopment to provide a residential-led, mixed-use development of up to 6 storeys comprising 135 residential units (34 x 1bed, 79 x 2bed and 22 x 3bed) and 247sqm of commercial space (A1, A2, A3, B1, D1 and D2), landscaped amenity space, car and cycle parking and associated works.
RECOMMENDATION: Grant planning permission subject to conditions and informatives and the completion of a satisfactory Section 106 or other legal agreement to secure the matters set out in the Heads of Terms of the agreement and delegate authority to the Head of Planning to issue the planning permission and Impose conditions (and informatives) to secure the matters set out in the report.
David Glover (Deputy Area Planning Manager) introduced the application and answered members’ questions.
Vipool Kotecha representing the owners of an adjoining land informed members that they had an intention to redevelop the land in future and were concerned that the proposed development would restrict the redevelopment of their land.
Ben Johnson (applicant) spoke to the Committee and answered members’ questions. He continued that the scheme would offer high quality design, new public highway/access and new homes in a highly accessible location with appropriate tenure mix. He added that the scheme had been subjected to a viability assessment which would be reviewed upon its completion. The applicant advised members that details of play space and equipment would be submitted at the detail stage of the application.
In response to members’ questions about the affordable housing units that the application would provide, David Glover clarified that although the local target was for 50% of the development, the viability assessment for the application confirmed that 26% was acceptable subject to a post implementation review. David Glover confirmed that the scheme had been set in from the site boundary to ensure it didn’t compromise the future development of the neighbouring site. In approving the application, members added an informative that damage to public realm as a result of the development be repaired prior to occupation.
DECISION: Granted planning permission as recommended and an informative that any damage to public realm as a result of the development be repaired prior to occupation. (Voting on the application was unanimous). |
|
16-0718 Land Surrounding Wembley Stadium Station, South Way, Wembley PDF 281 KB Minutes: PROPOSAL: Reserved matters application relating to condition 1 (layout, scale, appearance, access and landscaping) of outline permission 14/4931 dated 23/12/2016. This application relates to Building 3B within Plot SW03, and Plots SW04 and SW05 and sets out the proposed details for the construction of three buildings ranging from 6 to 20 storey in height, providing 553 residential units (in private rented, affordable rented and intermediate discount market sale), with private communal residential landscaped gardens and other open space, plant, cycle storage, refuse provision and associated infrastructure and ancillary space. The application seeks to discharge the following conditions relating to Building SW03B of Plot SW03 and Plots SW04 and SW05: 13(h) (wind), 13(k) (internal layout of buildings), 13(i) (access), 13(m) (daylight), 13(n) (private external space), 22 (play space) and 23 (adaptable units).
RECOMMENDATION: GRANT planning permission subject to any direction by the London Mayor pursuant to the Mayor of London Order, any direction by the Secretary of State pursuant to the Consultation Direction and delegate authority to the Head of Planning to issue the planning permission and impose conditions and informatives and a Section 106 deed of variation to secure the matters set out in the agreement.
That the Head of Planning is 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.
DECISION: Granted planning permission as recommended. (Voting was unanimous) |
|
16-5444 2A, Preston Waye and 283, 285 and 287 Preston Road, Harrow, HA3 PDF 350 KB Additional documents: Minutes: PROPOSAL: Demolition of the existing buildings and construction of a four storey building with a basement level providing 25 self-contained flats (11 x 1bed, 10 x 2bed and 4 x 3bed) with associated vehicular crossover off Preston Waye, car and cycle parking spaces, bin stores, amenity space and ancillary gym for private use by the residents
RECOMMENDATION: GRANT planning permission subject to the prior completion of a legal agreement to secure the planning obligations set out in the agreement, delegate authority to the Head of Planning authority to negotiate the legal agreement and to issue the planning permission and impose conditions and informatives to secure the matters set out in the report.
That the Head of Planning is 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, if by 3 months of the committee date (24th August 2017) the legal agreement has not been completed, the Head of Planning is delegated authority to refuse planning permission. 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.
Members noted the contents of the supplementary report which detailed additional recommendation for 2 additional conditions and a new section 106 Heads of Terms.
DECISION: Granted planning permission as recommended and additional conditions and a new section 106 Heads of Terms as set out in the supplementary report. (Voting was unanimous)
|
|
Parking Spaces rear of 181-189, East Lane, Wembley PDF 303 KB Additional documents: Minutes: PROPOSAL: Erection of a two storey three bedroom dwellinghouse with associated new vehicular crossover, car parking spaces, cycle and bin stores, landscaping and amenity space (modification to application 16/1338)
RECOMMENDATION: GRANT planning permission subject to conditions and that the Head of Planning is delegated authority to issue the planning permission and impose conditions and informatives to secure the matters set out in the report.
That the Head of Planning is 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.
David Glover (Deputy Area Planning Manager) introduced the application and answered members’ questions. He then referenced the supplementary which tabulated Councillor Daly’s objections and officers’ responses to them.
In accordance with the Planning Code of Practice, Councillor Daly declared a prejudicial interest in that she had previously expressed objections to the application. Councillor Daly raised highway concerns including traffic problems at the junction of East Lane with Harrowdene Road, access to North Wembley train station and difficulties with the servicing arrangement for the retail units in the area. She then left the meeting room during consideration of the application and took no further part in the voting or discussion.
John Fletcher (Highways) advised that from highways perspective, the scheme was considered acceptable however, he undertook to look again into the highways issues raised by Councillor Daly.
In the ensuing discussion, members sought details of the traffic impact of the application, the level of window obscurity to preserve privacy and also possible land contamination.
David Glover confirmed that there would be no significant traffic impact from the proposed development. He explained that levels of obscurity of windows cannot be specified but the purpose was to prevent overlooking and that the condition imposed would achieve this.
DECISION: Planning permission granted as recommended (Voting on the application was: For 6; Against 0; Abstention 1)
|
|
16 5237 53 Lonsdale Road, London, NW6 6RA PDF 624 KB Minutes: PROPOSAL: Change of use from vehicle repair garage (B2) to tap room (A4) at ground floor and first floor level.
RECOMMENDATION: GRANT planning permission subject to conditions and informatives and that the Head of Planning is delegated authority to issue the planning permission and impose conditions and informatives to secure the matters set out in the report.
That the Head of Planning is 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.
DECISION: Granted planning permission as recommended. (Voting was unanimous).
|
|
17 1000 19 Christchurch Avenue, London, NW6 7QP PDF 543 KB Additional documents: Minutes: PROPOSAL: Conversion of single dwelling into 5 self-contained flats (2 x studio, 1 x 1bed, 1 x 2bed and 1 x 3bed), with associated refuse storage and cycle parking
RECOMMENDATION: GRANT planning permission and that the Head of Planning is delegated authority to issue the planning permission and impose conditions and informatives to secure the matters set out in the report.
That the Head of Planning is 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.
Angus Saunders (Area Planning Manager) introduced the application and answered members’ questions. With reference to the supplementary report, he advised members about the revised plan which added detail of the front boundary. He then drew members’ attention to requests for the removal of permitted development rights for the building and the removal of the existing outbuilding and the reasons explaining why it was not possible to agree to the removals. Members noted that further objections had been raised by Councillor Shaw which had been addressed in the main report.
Sarah Sanders (objector) stated that the proposed development was excessively large and claimed that as it was not known that its use would be incidental to the main building, the scale and massing would contravene Brent Development Plan policies. She also expressed concerns on traffic impact of the development.
Melissa Collaro (applicant’s agent) addressed the meeting and answered members’ questions. She advised that the application had been approved following an appeal to the Planning Inspectorate and that the outbuilding complied with permitted development.
Angus Saunders advised members that the proposed development, which was not considered to be an over-development of the site, would have no harmful impact on neighbouring residents. He went on to clarify that if the use of the outbuilding was not incidental to the main building, enforcement action could be taken against the applicant. He advised that the property would need to be occupied for a meaningful period as a dwellinghouse for the permitted development works to be considered lawful before implementing the planning permission. He went on to clarify that if the use of the outbuilding was not incidental to the main building, the development would constitute a breach of planning condition 7, thus an enforcement action would be taken against the applicant.
DECISION: Granted planning permission as recommended. (Voting was recorded as follows: For 5; Against 1; Abstention 1)
|
|
16 1541PRE - Motivation House and HV House, First Way, Wembley PDF 239 KB Minutes: Michael Rottman and Christopher Mitchell gave a presentation on the development and responded to questions. Members then questioned the presenters and raised issues for further consideration prior to submission of a planning application.
The main issues raised at the meeting were: · Employment generation. · Scale and height of the development. · Transportation. · Vehicular movements and air quality. · Retail function and wider community needs.
|
|
Any Other Urgent Business Notice of items to be raised under this heading must be given in writing to the Head of Executive and Member Services or his representative before the meeting in accordance with Standing Order 64.
Minutes: None. |