Agenda item
1-42 INC, Thanet Lodge, Mapesbury Road, London, NW2 4JA (Ref. 13/3902)
Decision:
Deferred for further negotiations between the applicant and the residents, noting the desire of the residents to have the site self-contained from the rest of the Thanet Lodge site, to consider the following:
· Creation of revised pedestrian access via Mapesbury Road.
· Reinstatement of landscaping on the site after the implementation of the development.
· Consider an enhanced tree planting scheme on the site so that the one-to-one ratio mentioned in the draft condition was improved upon.
· Construction management plan to cover matters relating to how the development would be implemented (predominantly off Mapesbury Road).
· Need to consider how the development would impact on communal amenity space/delineation of the rear private terrace area.
· Enter into a Considerate Contractors’ Scheme (CCS).
Minutes:
PROPOSAL:
Erection of a 2 storey 1 x 4 bedroom dwellinghouse to the north of Thanet Lodge.
RECOMMENDATION: Grant planning permission subject to an additional condition requiring details of the green roof, the completion of a satisfactory Section 106 or other legal agreement and delegate authority to the Head of Area Planning or other duly authorised person to agree the exact terms thereof on advice from the Director of Legal and Procurement.
Andy Bates, Area Planning Manager, in reference to the tabled supplementary report addressed the queries raised by members at the site visit. He stated that details of how the trees would be protected would be secured by condition 5. He continued that the stability of the existing boundary wall would need to be considered and that any alteration, loss and or replacement of boundary treatments were covered by the Party Wall Act and drew members’ attention to informative 1 that reminded the applicant of their obligations. Members noted that the boundary treatment between the existing community space and private community space would be 2m in height. Andy Bates added that a further condition had been added to secure details of the green roof. He then addressed the issues raised in a further letter of objection from a resident and reiterated the recommendation for approval subject to an additional condition and a Section 106 legal agreement.
Several residents raised the following objections to the proposed development;
· Officers had placed a disproportionate amount of weight on the views expressed by the Planning Inspector on the decision for application reference 12/2813.
· Lack of community engagement in arriving at the scheme which residents did not consider acceptable.
· Loss of mature trees, communal garden space and residential amenity
· The development would lead to a destruction of communal gardens thus setting an undesirable precedent for future applications.
· Devaluation of the value of properties within Thanet Lodge
· Due to loss of amenities, the development should have resulted in a reduction in service charges however, this had not taken place.
· The development would result in a profit to Java Properties and a loss to residents of Thanet Lodge.
The residents also urged members to either defer the application to a future meeting or to impose the following additional conditions to secure the following, if they were minded to grant planning permission;
· Replacement of mature trees.
· Construction of pedestrian access for self-containment.
· Reinstatement of landscaping after construction.
· Party wall agreement should be in place prior to construction.
· Agreement for Considerate Construction Scheme (CCS).
· Use of brick work to model Mapesbury Conservation Area.
In accordance with the provisions of the Planning Code of Practice, Councillor Shaw, ward member stated that she had been approached by residents and that she had contacted the freeholder. Councillor Shaw spoke in agreement with the requests made by the residents and endorsed their request for deferral of the application.
Mr Michael Burroughs, the applicant’s agent, confirmed the applicant’s agreement with the requests for landscaping, tree replacement and to enter into the Considerate Contractors’ Scheme (CCS).
Members then debated the application. The legal representative advised that service charge levels and devaluation of property values were not material planning considerations and should therefore be disregarded. He took a view that loss or diminution of communal open space was a material planning consideration in this context and cautioned members about the possibility of a potential judicial review if that was ignored and the committee was found to have acted unlawfully. With that in view he advised members to consider deferring the application to encourage community engagement and further negotiations given that the developer had recently met with residents to discuss those pertinent issues on matters raised by them and on balance this seemed a reasonable approach to take.
DECISION:
Deferred for further negotiations between the applicant and the residents, noting the desire of the residents to have the site self-contained from the rest of the Thanet Lodge site and to consider the following:
· Creation of revised pedestrian access via Mapesbury Road.
· Reinstatement of landscaping on the site after the implementation of the development.
· Consider an enhanced tree planting scheme on the site so that the one-to-one ratio mentioned in the draft condition was improved upon.
· Construction management plan to cover matters relating to how the development would be implemented (predominantly off Mapesbury Road).
· Need to consider how the development would impact on communal amenity space/delineation of the rear private terrace area.
· Enter into a Considerate Contractors’ Scheme (CCS).
Supporting documents: