Agenda item

2A, Preston Waye and 283, 285 & 287 Preston Road, Harrow, HA3 (Ref.18/4902)

Decision:

Granted planning permission as recommended with an additional condition that the future occupiers will not be entitled to event day parking and any CPZ permits.

 

Minutes:

PROPOSAL: Demolition of buildings and erection of a 2 to 4 storey residential building comprising 35 self-contained flats (6 x studios, 12 x 1 bed, 10 x two bed and 7 x 3 bed) with basement level, provision for car and cycle parking and associated landscaping.

 

RECOMMENDATION: That the Committee resolve to GRANT planning permission subject to the prior completion of a legal agreement to secure the planning obligations set out within the Committee reports.

 

That the Head of Planning is delegated authority to negotiate the legal agreement indicated above.

 

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, 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 the "expiry date" of the planning application 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.

 

Ms Victoria McDonagh (Development Management Team Leader, North) introduced the report and answered Members’ questions.  The application had been deferred from the last meeting when Members were minded to refuse for the reasons stated within the report.  She explained that the applicant had reviewed their affordable housing proposals and now proposed 2 affordable rented units (comprising a three bedroom and a two- bedroom home) and 1 shared ownership unit (studio). In respect of design, massing and scale, she drew Members’ attention to the materiality of the extant consented planning permission which the applicant could implement for a 25-unit scheme.  With that in view, it was considered that the current proposal would not result in undue harmful impact on the character of the locality.

 

Ms McDonagh informed the Committee that following surveys, officers in Transportation had advised that there was spare parking capacity available in the area hence the development would not have adverse impact on the junction operation. As such, parking demand can be safely accommodated within the site, but that if car ownership exceeded the average for the area, there would be spare on-street parking capacity available to accommodate the potential excess.  The redundant crossover in Preston Road would also assist with the parking facilities. She continued that the arrangement for refuse collection was deemed to be safe as officers in Highways had confirmed that the route is straight and wide with few (if any) pedestrians along it.

 

Messrs Ben Thomas and Fred Akuffo (Agents) addressed the Committee and answered Members’ questions. Mr Thomas drew Members’ attention to the provision of affordable housing units as clarified by the officer and the viability assessment review to capture any uplift in values.  He continued that the applicant had offered affordable housing with this application rather than implement the extant consent without affordable housing.  He added that the height, massing and scale were not different from the consented permission.  In response to questions about transport and parking, Mr Thomas drew attention to the submissions by the Council’s Highways officers which confirmed acceptance.

 

Members then raised questions relating to transport generation and the methodology of the surveys conducted.  Mr John Fletcher (Highways Officer) responded that the surveys which involved overnight and morning monitoring as well as site visits concluded that vehicle generation could be accommodated. He added that any potential overspill could be addressed via the pay and display parking system available in the area. 

 

Members expressed a view for the parking situation to be addressed properly and with that in mind, added a further condition that future occupiers will not be entitled to event day parking permits and also not be entitled to future CPZ permits.

 

DECISION: Granted planning permission as recommended with an additional condition that the residents will not be entitled to event day parking and future CPZ permits.

(Voting on the recommendation was: For 7, Against 1, Abstention 0).

 

Note: Councillor Maurice asked to be excused from the meeting after the consideration of this application.

 

Supporting documents: