Issue - meetings
GEKO House, Kimberley Road, London NW6 7SG (Ref. 09/1312)
Meeting: 16/09/2009 - Planning Committee (Item 17)
17 GEKO House, Kimberley Road, London NW6 7SG (Ref. 09/1312) 
PDF 253 KB
Minutes:
|
09/1312 |
Creation of second floor to existing building to provide 5 self contained flats with terraces to rear and side, 3 new ground floor windows and refuse store doors to rear of existing warehouse and new shared entrance at rear, blocking up of door and window at ground floor and window at first floor side, provision of 5 car parking spaces and refuse & bicycle storage to rear of site.
|
|
|
OFFICER RECOMMENDATION: Grant planning permission subject to the completion of a satisfactory Section 106 or other legal agreement and delegate authority to the Director of Environmental & Culture to agree the exact terms thereof on advice from the Borough Solicitor. |
|
|
With reference to the tabled supplementary information, the Planning Manager Andy Bates clarified the actual increase in height adding that in general, the proposed height of GEKO House would be approximately 3.3m lower than Kimberley Court and approximately 1m lower than the main roof of the top flats of Hoopers Yard. He also referred to a further letter of support from the applicant’s agent.
Mr David Keighley objected to the proposed development on the following grounds:
Loss of privacy
Loss of security
Overbearing
Inadequate parking facilities
Detrimental impact on residential amenities.
Ms Xenia Wall an objector stated that there was no material difference between this and a previous application that was refused by the Committee. She continued that the proposal which she considered to be an over-development of the site would lead to over-looking, loss of privacy and loss of daylight to living areas of her property. Ms Wall felt that she had not been given adequate information on the changes to the plans for a proposal which would generate an increase in traffic and associated parking problems.
Mr Julian Sutton the applicant’s agent stated that the proposal which complied with Supplementary Planning Guidance 17 (SPG 17) would have significant benefits including sustainability. He added that none of the windows would overlook other properties and therefore claims about loss of privacy and security were both unfounded and misplaced.
In addressing some of the issues raised, Andy Bates informed the Committee that the location of the windows coupled with obscure glazing would overcome the possibility of overlooking and loss of privacy. He added that changes to the scheme had resulted in less impact and enhanced the relationship of the proposal with other properties in the area. He confirmed that the proposal complied with SPG 17.
During discussion Councillor Baker expressed an opinion that there were inconsistencies in the plans and moved an amendment for deferral to enable interested parties to be re-consulted. In response to that Steve Weeks stated that amendments made to the scheme were not substantial and did not raise new adverse issues to warrant formal re-consultation with neighbours.
|
DECISION: Planning permission granted subject to the completion of a satisfactory Section 106 or other legal agreement and delegate authority to the Director of Environmental & Culture to agree the exact terms thereof on advice from the Borough Solicitor. |
Note: Councillor Green ... view the full minutes text for item 17