Issue - meetings

Granted planning permission subject to the conditions and informatives as set out in the Committee report

PROPOSAL

Demolition of existing 17 garages and development of land to provide four new dwellinghouses, parking, refuse and cycle storage and associated landscaping..

RECOMMENDATION~:

That the Committee resolve to GRANT planning permission subject to:

(1)        That the Head of Planning is delegated authority to issue the planning permission and impose conditions and informatives as detailed in the report.

(2)        That the Head of Planning is delegated 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.

Lena Summers, Planning Officer, South Area Planning Team, introduced the report and set out the key issues. In introducing the report members were advised that the current site comprised of two rows of single storey garages (17 in total) and adjacent hardstanding to the rear of Yates Court to the northern side of Willesden Lane. The site was not within a conservation area as designated in Brent’s Local Plan and did not impact on any Listed Building. The proposal would also see improved landscaping and enhanced amenity space to include a new children’s play area. The massing and height of the proposed development aligned with guidance and was not considered to have a negative impact on neighbouring gardens. It was confirmed that 19 objections had been received from neighbouring residents.

Officers drew the Committee’s attention to a typo in Section 2.44 of the report that stated a dwelling was a 5 bed, 7 person property, this was incorrect and should have stated a 4 bed, 7 person property.

As no further questions were raised by members at this point, the Chair invited Ms Elaine Moore (objector) to address the Committee (in person) in relation to the application. Ms Moore introduced herself as a local resident before proceeding to highlight the following key points:

·             It was felt that the proposed dwellings were not in keeping with the context and character of the existing homes and local environment.

·             Concerns were raised that a Constructions Logistics Plan had not been made available at the application stage, therefore residents were unsure about how they may be affected during the construction phase, this had caused heightened concerns for existing residents (particularly those with assisted living requirements) in terms of the potential impacts on health and safety.

·             Ms Moore felt that the proposed location of the children’s play space was not suitable as it would limit natural surveillance as well as resulting in the loss of trees and light.

·             Ms Moore felt that the parking surveys undertaken did not provide a true representation of the demand for parking spaces. She advised the Committee that the car park was frequently at  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6