Agenda, decisions and minutes
Venue: Committee Rooms 1, 2 and 3, Brent Town Hall, Forty Lane, Wembley, HA9 9HD. View directions
Contact: Joe Kwateng, Democratic Services 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 financial or other interest in the items on this agenda. Minutes: Councillor Hashmi declared an interest as a Brent Housing Partnership Board member in respect of item 10, 1-82 Inc, Landau House and was not present to consider and vote on this application. |
|||||||||||
Minutes of the Previous Meetings Held on 13 October 2009 and 21 October 2009 PDF 72 KB The minutes of the meeting held on 13 October 2009 (to follow) Minutes: RESOLVED:-
(i) that the minutes of the previous meeting held on 13 October 2009 be approved as an accurate record of the meeting
(ii) that the minutes of the meeting held on 21 October 2009 be approved as an accurate record of the meeting. |
|||||||||||
37 Geary Road, London, NW10 1HJ (Ref. 09/1962) PDF 274 KB Decision: Application deferred to allow for further investigations into the issues raised at the Members’ site visit. Minutes:
The Planning Manager Andy Bates advised that due to a number of issues raised during the site visit, this application was being recommended for deferral in order to address the concerns that had been raised.
|
|||||||||||
Public Convenience, Victoria Road, London, NW6 (Ref. 09/0968) PDF 254 KB Decision: Planning permission granted for a temporary period the length of which to be delegated to officers and to reflect the lease arrangements, due to the site’s location within a major opportunity site which may be required for a different use/s in future and subject to conditions. Minutes:
The Planning Manager Andy Bates drew Members’ attention to the supplementary information circulated at the meeting. This included a further representation from Councillor Arnold on the application and a confirmation from Environmental Health and StreetCare unit that they had no record of any complaints from residents with regard to Veolia’s operation within the adjacent underground car park on Victoria Road.
Mr Al Forsyth, a local resident, stated that a consultant employed by the Council had reported to the Council’s Asset Management that in view of its situation the site which had been identified as a major opportunity site could potentially be redeveloped to provide housing. He felt that a masterplan needed to be provided for the whole site before being considered for disposal. Mr Al Forsyth stated that the present building should be removed as its curtilage was attracting litter. In reply to a query from the Chair, Al Forsyth stated that he understood that the applicant, Veolia, was not interested in a short term lease arrangement.
In accordance with the Planning Code of Practice, Councillor Dunn stated that he had been in contact with Veolia and Al Forsyth and that he was a ward councillor for where the site was located. Councillor Dunn stated that the site had remained in its present state for some time and that the working conditions for Veolia staff were currently inadequate, with no changing or storage facilities. He suggested that the application would improve conditions for staff and enable them to provide an improved service, whilst the other 2 potential sites that had been explored were not feasible. Councillor Dunn said he had no objection to the use proposed and that he had not received any complaints from residents objecting to this use.
During discussion, Councillor Thomas, in acknowledging the potential regeneration benefits of the site felt that it would not be appropriate to approve this application at this stage. Councillor Cummins enquired as to whether it was possible to grant a temporary lease in view if the site’s potential. Councilllor Powney remarked that Veolia were already 2 years into its 7 years waste and recycling contract with the Council, a fact which should be taken into consideration if a temporary lease was to be agreed.
In reply to the issues raised, Andy Bates advised that Veolia were attempting to secure a long term lease of the site and that granting permission for this site would not exclude future planning applications. Steve Weeks (Head of Area Planning) stated that he understood the lease was for 7 years and that a longer term temporary planning consent could be considered although Members were asked to note the applicant’s concerns.
Members agreed to the suggestion by the Head of Area Planning that planning permission be granted for temporary period, the length of ... view the full minutes text for item 4. |
|||||||||||
2A Preston Waye and 283-287 odd, Preston Road, Harrow (09/2136) PDF 213 KB Decision: Minded to refuse the application had it not been withdrawn. Minutes:
The Head of Area Planning Steve Weeks drew Members’ attention to the supplementary information circulated at the meeting and in particular further objections and additional comments received from. He also drew members’ attention to an amendment to reason for refusal number 2.
David Pearson, in objecting to the application, confirmed that he was a resident in Preston Waye and a member of Preston Amenity Protection Allocation (PAPA). He objected to the application on the grounds of its scale and obstruction to the views of dwellings to the rear of 281 Preston Road. Mr Pearson added that the proposed development would generate excessive traffic along a road that was already difficult to navigate, a situation made worse by visitor/shopper vehicles using the narrow road, Preston Waye.
Bill Kemp, in objecting to the application, confirmed that he was representing the views of PAPA as its’ Chair and of local residents. He objected to the application on the grounds of its excessive height, density, appearance and out of character with the area.
Mr Frederick Akufo, the applicant’s architect, circulated photographs to Members with the agreement of the Chair. Mr Frederick Akufo stated that an earlier application had been withdrawn in order to address concerns in respect of access to block B, the appearance of the flank wall on the western part of the site and the quality of the amenity space. The new application included a reduction of the flank wall from 3 to 2 storeys and an increase in the amenity space area. Mr Frederick Akufo acknowledged that the canopy feature was still of concern and offered to remove it from the scheme. He asserted that the issues raised by residents for this application had not been received until after the application had been submitted. Mr Akufo requested the Committee to defer the application so that the issues raised could be addressed through discussions with officers and residents.
Members considered that a deferral was not appropriate and accordingly the application was refused.
|
|||||||||||
2 Highfield Avenue, London, NW9 0PA (09/1880)) PDF 281 KB Decision: Planning permission refused as amended in reason 2 as set out in the supplementary information. Minutes:
The Head of Area Planning Steve Weeks drew Members’ attention to the supplementary information circulated at the meeting and confirmed that the application had been withdrawn. He referred to the applicant’s comments made at the site meeting and to a letter received from Barry Gardiner MP.
Mr Vekaria, the agent, stated that an earlier application that had been approved could not be carried out due to a number of impracticalities. He asserted that there was a 400mm discrepancy with the indicated roof height in relation to the original house and that the overall height was further increased by the inaccurate representation of the ground levels. He felt that the application was acceptable and that Members should be minded to approve it, had it not been withdrawn.
In accordance with the Planning Code of Practice, Councillor Crane confirmed that he had been approached by local residents in respect of this application and that he was a ward councillor for where the site was located. He stated that although there had already been planning consent from an earlier application, works could not be undertaken due to the steepness of the slope. Having visited the site, Councillor Crane pointed out that differences between the internal height of the ceiling and the floor level had been a particular issue. In his view that the application could be acceptable providing that the applicant discussed with residents, the possibility of removing the side window from the proposal.
The Chair commented that the applicant should have considered the suggestions made by officers in the report before making submitting any further applications.
|
|||||||||||
110-118 inc, Kilburn Square, London, NW6 6PS (09/0410) PDF 304 KB Decision: Planning permission granted subject to conditions, deletion of condition 7, an additional informative and on the completion of a satisfactory Section 106 as amended in the Heads of Terms as set out in the supplementary information or other legal agreement and delegate authority to the Director of Environment and Culture to agree the exact terms thereof on advice from the Borough Solicitor. Minutes:
The Planning Manager Andy Bates drew Members’ attention to the deletion of condition 7, an additional informative and an amendment to point (b) of the Heads of Terms of the Section 106 Agreement as set out in the supplementary information circulated at the meeting. He also highlighted the reasons why Councillor Dunn’s suggestion of a financial contribution towards community space to be included in the Section 106 agreement was not appropriate as the scale of the development did not justify the contribution. The Planning Manager however added that the amendment to the Heads of Terms would be used to help improve facilities within the locality.
In accordance with the Planning Code of Practice, Councillor Dunn, a ward, confirmed that he had been in contact with both the applicant’s architect and the local residents about the application. Councillor Dunn stated that he understood through discussions with the applicant’s architect that the proposal was intended to provide infilling on the 1st floor aspect facing Kilburn High Road. He sought confirmation as to how many units were ultimately proposed and the level of impact the proposal would have in terms of its scale. He however expressed his support for the application on the grounds that it represented an improvement on the present condition of the site.
In reply, the Planning Manager advised that no proposals had been received with regards to the front aspect of the site referred to by Councillor Dunn, however he was aware that the applicant’s architect was considering the possibility of additional flats. The applicant had been encouraged to submit a more comprehensive scheme but had chosen to take a more piecemeal approach. Andy Bates advised that any additional units would mean that more affordable housing would need to be provided, drawing Members’ attention to point (e) of the Heads of Terms of the Section 106 agreement which stated that a previous planning consent for Kilburn Square could not be implemented if this application was approved.
|
|||||||||||
50A & 50C, Cavendish Road, London, NW6 7XP (Ref. 09/2099) PDF 235 KB Decision: Planning permission granted subject to conditions and an amendment to condition 3 as set out in the supplementary information. Minutes:
|
|||||||||||
Brilliant Kids, 8 Station Terrace, London, NW10 5RT (09/2176) PDF 293 KB Decision: Application deferred for a site visit in order to assess the impact of the proposal. Minutes:
The Planning Manager, Andy Bates drew Members’ attention to the supplementary information circulated at the meeting which included details submitted by the applicant on the proposed sound proofing system and amendments to condition 3.
Ms Julia Harvey, a local resident, stated that noise from the premises was a problem when it had previously been used as a café. She felt that the current application would cause further problems as it proposed to extend the operating hours from a closing time of 20.00 to 23.00 Monday to Saturday and to 22.30 Sunday. Ms Harvey added that she was not aware of any other restaurant within the residential area, situated adjacent to a ground floor flat and which opened at unsociable times. In addition, the proposed cafe was adjacent to her baby’s bedroom and as such would disrupt his sleep. Ms Harvey expressed concern that the lean-to on the site would result in excessive noise in the alleyway.
Stewart Freeman, in objecting to the application, confirmed that he was the freeholder of the property in which Julia Harvey lived. He also queried why extended hours were being proposed in view of the noise problems reported about the premises in the past. He also enquired as to how the lean-to could be soundproofed and whether this feature could be removed. Stewart Freeman requested the Committee to agree to a site visit in order to assess the impact of the proposal.
During discussion, Councillor Cummins felt that it would be reasonable to restrict the operating hours to 20.00 in view of the proximity of the premises to residential dwellings. In noting that the previous owner had breached the condition concerning non-use of the rear garden, Councillor Cummins stated that enforcement action should be taken if this condition was breached again by the applicant. He sought views with regard to the lean-to and felt that the applicant should be asked to confirm its’ removal and suggested that a site visit would be useful. Councillor H M Patel sought confirmation with regard to the condition which prevented use of the rear garden by the café. The Chair sought confirmation of the location of the adjoining property’s bedroom in relation to the café.
In reply, the Planning Manager confirmed that there was a condition which prevented use of the rear garden as an eating area for customers and that this had been an enforcement issue with the previous owner. He did not think that the current applicant intended to make use of the rear garden as part of the café, which would have access problems for customers according to the design plans that had been submitted. Members heard that the applicant was aware that ... view the full minutes text for item 9. |
|||||||||||
1-82 Inc, Landau House, Chatsworth Road, London, NW2 (Ref. 09/1691) PDF 211 KB Decision: Planning permission granted subject to a condition. Minutes:
Councillor Hashmi declared an interest in this application as a Brent Housing Partnership (BHP) Board member and was not present to consider and vote on this application.
|
|||||||||||
46 Hillfield Avenue, Wembley, HA0 4JP (Ref. 09/2124) PDF 259 KB Decision: Planning permission granted subject to conditions, an informative and an amendment to condition 2 as set out in the supplementary information. Minutes:
The Planning Manager David Glover drew Members’ attention to an amendment to condition 2 as set out in the supplementary information circulated at the meeting.
|
|||||||||||
1-4 & Garages Holmfield & 2, Crawford Avenue, Wembley, HA0 2HT (Ref. 09/3080) PDF 282 KB Decision: Planning permission granted subject conditions, informatives and on the completion of a satisfactory Section 106 or other legal agreement and delegate authority to the Director of Environment and Culture to agree the exact terms thereof on advice from the Borough Solicitor.
Minutes:
The Chair declared an interest in that the applicant was a client of the organisation he worked for, however the applicant was not a personal client of his. However, the Chair felt that this interest was not personal or prejudicial and he therefore remained present during consideration of the application.
The Planning Manager David Glover drew Members’ attention to additional comments in respect of issues raised at the site visit as set out in the supplementary information circulated at the meeting.
|
|||||||||||
14 Blenheim Gardens, Wembley, HA9 7NP (Ref. 09/2194) PDF 230 KB Decision: Planning permission granted subject to conditions, informatives and amendments to conditions 3, 5 and 7 and additional conditions 10 and 11 as set out in the supplementary information. Minutes:
The Planning Manager David Glover drew Members’ attention to details of an amended drawing submitted by the applicant, amendments to conditions 3, 5 and 7 and additional conditions 10 and 11 as set out in the supplementary information circulated at the meeting.
Councillor Cummins sought clarification on the reference to wooden cladding to the front of the building and brick built on other elevations.
In reply, the Head of Area Planning Steve Weeks advised that the outbuilding would be constructed of bricks with a tiled roof and timber cladding to the front of the building as set out in amended condition 7.
|
|||||||||||
Unit 1, Wharfside, Rosemont Road, Wembley, HA0 4PE (Ref. 09/2102) PDF 239 KB Decision: Minded to approve had the application not been withdrawn. Minutes:
The Planning Manager David Glover advised that the applicant had withdrawn the application for reasons as set out in the supplementary information circulated at the meeting,
The Head of Area Planning Steve Weeks advised of a correction to the recommendation in the supplementary information circulated at the meeting which ought to read “Members be minded grant approval of the application had it not been withdrawn.
|
|||||||||||
1A-E 2A-F-14 A-F Inc, MIDDLESEX HOUSE, Northwick Road, Wembley (Ref. 09/2223) PDF 216 KB Decision: Planning permission granted subject to conditions and an additional condition, deletion of condition 7 and on the completion of a satisfactory Section 106 or other legal agreement and delegate authority to the Director of Environment and Culture to agree the exact terms thereof on advice from the Borough Solicitor as set out in the supplementary information. Minutes:
The Planning Manager David Glover drew Members’ attention to additional comments, an additional condition and deletion of condition 7 as set out in the supplementary information circulated at the meeting.
The Chair confirmed that, as mentioned during the site visit, the ground floor was being considered for the development of 3 flats which appeared not to have natural light or outlook, matters which were not mentioned in the report. It was noted that the Director of Planning would be granted delegated authority to investigate the design aspects of the application.
|
|||||||||||
Date of Next Meeting Minutes: It was noted that the next meeting was scheduled for Wednesday, 25th November 2009 at 7.00 pm and that the site visit would take place the preceding Saturday, 21st November at 9.30 am where the coach leaves Brent House.
|
|||||||||||
Any Other Urgent Business Notice of items to be raised under this heading must be given in writing to the Democratic Services Manager or his representative before the meeting in accordance with Standing Order 65. Decision: None. Minutes: Steve Weeks announced that Geoff Hewlett was leaving the Council shortly and that Members would have the opportunity to bid him farewell at the Planning Committee meeting on the 10th December 2009.
|