Agenda and draft minutes

Planning Committee
Monday 9 October 2017 6.00 pm

Venue: Boardrooms 3&4 - Brent Civic Centre, Engineers Way, Wembley HA9 0. View directions

Contact: Joe Kwateng, Governance Officer 

Items
No. Item

1.

Declarations of interests

Members are invited to declare at this stage of the meeting, the nature and existence of any relevant disclosable pecuniary, personal or prejudicial interests in the items on this agenda and to specify the item(s) to which they relate.

Minutes:

110 Walm Lane London NW2 4RS

Councillor Colacicco, ward member declared that she had previously objected to an application for the site.

 

Approaches

Al members declared that they had received an email communication from the agents for 110 Walm Lane London NW2 4RS.

 

2.

Land at 370 High Road, London, NW10 2EA and 54-68 Dudden Hill Lane, London, NW10 1DG pdf icon PDF 431 KB

Minutes:

The Committee received a briefing on a pre-application scheme for a mixed use development consisting of 224 residential units, a supermarket, nursery, gym, café, workshops and amenity space.

 

Peter Mahoney and Nick Francis (R55) presented the scheme and answered members’ questions. Members then went into a session during which they examined the proposal and raised the following issues for further consideration prior to submission of a planning application.

The main issues raised at the meeting were:

 

Issue 1 – Locally Significant Industrial Site

·         Concern about loss of existing shopping parade and jobs.

 

Issue 2 – Affordable Housing and Workspace

·         Advocate 25% family housing.

·         Ensure no ‘poor doors’ for affordable housing provision.

·         Questioned reduction from initial proposal in terms of level of affordable housing provision from 65% to 50%.

·         Queried tenure split not following policy.

 

Issue 3 – A1 retail use in out of town location

·         Concerns about large servicing vehicles and impact on residential amenity.

 

Issue 4 – Scale, massing, height and impact on daylight/sunlight

·         Concern raised about the amount of development on the site.

·         Potential for public space to attract ant-social behaviour.

·         Difficult to provide detailed comments without full information (i.e. daylight sunlight report) for analysis.

 

Issue 5 – Public Realm

·         No further comments.

 

Other Comments

·         Question whether adequate servicing and parking provided.

·         Assurance pre-application consultation carried out.

·         There should be an extra pedestrian crossing and traffic calming (particularly in view of proposed nursery).

·         Should be crossings at both ends of development.

·         Not clear on need for pedestrian route through development as other quicker alternative routes.

·         Question how parking for LIDL shop would be managed.      

 

3.

Wembley Youth Centre and former Dennis Jackson Centre, London Road, Wembley, HA9 7EU pdf icon PDF 4 MB

Minutes:

The Committee received a briefing on a pre-application scheme which proposed thedemolition of existing community centre and erection of three buildings ranging in height from 3- to 6-storeys containing 150 residential units (including private, temporary and NAIL tenure housing), including a replacement community centre.

 

Stephen Martin and Charlotte Pollard (PRP Architects) presented the scheme and answered members’ questions. Members then went into a session during which they examined the proposal and raised the following issues for further consideration prior to submission of a planning application.

The main issues raised at the meeting were:

 

Issue 1 – Principle of development

·         Full detail of community centre would be required.

·         Queried rationale behind loss of open space.

 

Issue 2 – Housing, tenure mix, including Affordable Housing

·         Council own development should be 100% affordable housing.

 

Issue 3 – Design, height and massing of development within its local context.

·         Queried rationale behind building heights.

 

Issue 4 – Impact on amenity of neighbouring properties

·         Need clarification on daylight/sunlight.

 

Issue 5 – Quality of residential accommodation

·         Concern over stacking of units.

·         Concern as to whether sufficient amenity space is being provided.

·         A compromise on quality for temporary accommodation should not be accepted (temporary can be for a fairly long period). E.g. Lack of windows to kitchens not considered acceptable.

·         Queried whether space would be provided in the NAIL accommodation for visitors to stay.

·         Provision should be made in NAIL accommodation to store mobility vehicles.

 

Issue 6 – Transport

·         Need to consider ‘no right turn’ to London Rd from Wembley High Rd.

·         Over provision of cycle parking?

·         Concern over additional activity on London Road, particularly on event days.

 

Other Comments

·         Detailed construction plan required to include routes for vehicles, hours operation etc to ensure impact on residents minimised. 

·         Queried level of community engagement.

 

4.

110 Walm Lane, London, NW2 4RS pdf icon PDF 410 KB

Minutes:

The Committee received a briefing on a pre-application for a scheme for the replacement of existing building (containing a public house and former members club) with a mixed use development comprising a public house and function room (A4) and 48 residential flats (C3)..

 

Luke Raistrick, Nick Mokasis and John Losi (Martin Robeson Planning Practice) presented the scheme and answered members’ questions. Members then went into a session during which they examined the proposal and raised the following issues for further consideration prior to submission of a planning application.

The main issues raised at the meeting were:

 

Issue 1 – Principle

·         Need to ensure that the community space is not just finished to ‘shell and core’ standard.

 

Issue 2 – Design, Heritage and Impact on Conservation Area

·         Questioned massing and density.

·         Concern regarding modern design.

·         Concern over loss of existing building- consider façade retention?

·         Queried how it can be demonstrated that the building will be of high quality.

·         Queried depth of frontage.

·         Restrictions should be placed on use of balconies to avoid clutter.

 

Issue 3 – Scale, massing, height and impact on daylight/sunlight

·         Would require confirmation that complies with Council’s standards.

 

Issue 4 – Public Realm

·         No further comments. 

 

Issue 5 – Affordable Housing

·         Require up to date financial modelling. 

 

Issue 6 – Standard of Accommodation

·         Noise mitigation needed in view of proximity to railway line.

 

Other Comments

·         Requested detail on the response to public consultation.

·         Comments have not suggested that the proposed building is exceptional.

·         Queried licencing for existing pub and if there is a special arrangement.

·         Noted the servicing bay – need to consider bus stop opposite. 

·         Blenheim Gardens Residents should be added to the consultation list