Agenda item
113 Bryan Avenue, London, NW10 2AS (Ref. 11/2665)
Decision:
Grant planning permission, subject to the completion of a satisfactory Section 106 or other legal agreement and delegate authority to the Head of Area Planning to agree the exact terms thereof on advice from the Legal and Procurement Service.
Minutes:
PROPOSAL: Demolition of existing warehouse building and erection of four 5 bedroomed terraced dwellinghouses.
|
RECOMMENDATION: Grant planning permission, subject to the completion of a satisfactory Section 106 or other legal agreement and delegate authority to the Head of Area Planning to agree the exact terms thereof on advice from the Director of Legal and Procurement.
|
Andy Bates, Area Planning Manager addressed the issues raised by residents in respect of car parking, over-development, architectural quality and character. In respect of car parking, he stated that although the parking requirements for the proposed houses would increase, there was sufficient capacity to accommodate the increase in on-street parking. This conclusion was based on existing parking conditions in the vicinity, the restoration of the existing crossover to increase on-street provision and the removal of any demand for servicing vehicles to the site.
In terms of the design and appearance of the development, Officers considered that whilst the development would be different to neighbouring houses, that in itself did not make the scheme unacceptable. He continued that the proposal which was a contemporary interpretation of a terrace would replace the existing unattractive warehouse building as well as enhance the character of the area. He added that although the proposal did not seek to copy the existing semi-detached buildings found in Bryan Avenue, officers considered that it would not be out of character with the houses in Dobree Estate. The Area Planning Manager also informed the Committee that an 87 signature petition objecting to the proposal and calling on Councillors to refuse the planning application had been received but it did not raise additional issues.
Mr Paolo Di Gennaro objected to the proposed development on the following grounds:
(i) The height which would be 1m higher than existing houses would be excessive and lead to overshadowing and loss of residential amenity.
(ii) Significant loss of light resulting in infringement of right to light.
(iii) It would be contrary to the Council’s Supplementary Planning Guidance 17 (SPG17).
Dr Robert Davis, an objector stated that although he did not want the warehouse building to be retained, the proposed development raised car parking issues. He clarified that with inadequate parking spaces and likely excessive demand for parking in the front garden, the proposal would ruin the character of Bryan Avenue.
In accordance with the Planning Code of Practice, Councillor Shaw, ward member stated that she had been approached by residents who objected to the proposal. Councillor Shaw objected to the proposed development on the grounds that it would result in a significant demand for parking particularly in relation to houses with multiple occupation. She continued that the height and ridge of the roof together with the layout of the road would be uncharacteristic and would destroy the leafy atmosphere of an Area of Distinctive Residential Character (ADRC). Councillor Shaw expressed a view that the £60,000 contribution under the Section 106 legal agreement was inadequate in view of its adverse impact on the entire Dobree Estate. In response to question by the Chair on the number of bedrooms, Councillor Shaw stated that a moderate development of 2-3 bedrooms for each house would be in keeping with the character of the houses in the area. She urged members to consider the depth of objections expressed in the 87 signature petition against the grant of planning permission for the development.
Mr Geoff Broklehurst, the applicant’s agent stated that the proposed residential development was considered appropriate for what was currently a brownfield site. He continued that the additional on-street parking available would limit demand for parking in the Bryan Avenue area. He added that the size of the residential accommodation exceeded the guidelines set out in the London Design Guide. In response to a question, Mr Broklehurst stated that a right to light specialist had suggested that the criteria against which the right to light was assessed was considered acceptable.
In the discussion that followed, Councillor Daly asked the Area Planning Manager to comment on the issue of loss of light. Councillor Sheth also asked him to comment on the breach of the building line and the condition on permitted development rights. Councillor Cummins commented that the height of the fourth house was excessive and could be removed in order to preserve residential amenity. Councillor Cummins also expressed concerns about inadequate parking facilities and over-intensive use of the site
The Area Planning Manager advised that an independent consultant had confirmed that the re-siting of the new building and the reduction in the overall length of the building would not result in a loss of light to existing side facing windows to a degree that would warrant refusal. He added that the breach of the building line was in itself not a significant problem and what was important was how the development related to its setting. Although the new building would be approximately 1m further forward than the existing building, it was acceptable in design terms and would be a significant improvement upon the vacant warehouse building currently on site. The Area Planning Manager clarified that condition 3 would require the owners not to extend the properties without prior planning permission.
In noting the responses submitted by the Area Planning Manager, Councillor Sheth moved an amendment for use class E (outbuilding development) to be added to the list of use classes for which prior permission would be required, thus amending condition 3. This was put to the vote and declared carried by a majority. Members then voted on the substantive recommendation as amended in condition 3 which was declared carried by a majority decision.
DECISION: Planning permission granted, subject to conditions as amended in condition 3 to include a restriction on Class E and informative to relevant British Standard, the completion of a satisfactory Section 106 or other legal agreement and delegate authority to the Head of Area Planning to agree the exact terms thereof on advice from the Director of Legal and Procurement.
Supporting documents: