Issue - meetings

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

PROPOSAL

Proposed change of disused sports area to provide 2 padel courts with associated fencing and new path.

RECOMMENDATION

(1)  That the committee resolve to GRANT planning permission subject to conditions.

That the Head of Planning is delegated authority to issue the planning permission and impose conditions and informatives to secure the following matters:

Conditions

1. Time Limit

2 Approved Plans

3 Materials

4. Arboricultural Method Statement, Impact Assessment and Tree Protection

5. Opening Hours

Informative

1. Building near a boundary

2. Fire Safety

(2)  That the Head of Planning and Development Services is 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.

Damian Manhertz (Development Management Area Manager, Brent Council) introduced the application, sought the use of a disused sports area to provide 2 padel courts with associated fencing and new path. The application site related to an area of land to the northwestern corner of the Willesden Sports Centre as well an area to the south to form a proposed pathway to join up with an existing pathway within the site. The site was located on the south side of Donnington Road.

The Chair raised clarifying questions around whether the 2 padel courts were proposed to be built on the disused tennis courts in an area formed of hardstanding. Confirmation was provided that that the proposed courts were on a large tarmacked, hardstanding area of land. Additional questions were raised around the necessity of constructing a path in the area, noting that when tennis was previously played there, no path existed. Officers explained that, upon review, a path might also have been beneficial for the tennis courts, as it would prevent people from tracking dirt and mud onto the court from the grass, which could create a slippery surface. Access would be improved to the area.

The Chair thanked Damian Manhertz for introducing the report, and then invited Mr Pambakian (who had registered to speak in objection to the application) to address the Committee.  The following key points were highlighted:

·                The proposal was submitted a year ago and an appeal had been filed. Mr Pambakian had petitioned a number of residents from the neighbourhood who were concerned that the development would occur in their quiet neighbourhood.

·                The original plans for constructing a canopy had been revised to enhance its appeal by opting for single-glazed panels.

·                Most of the houses in the area were residential and included lofts. He felt that the glass panels would not effectively reduce the high noise levels from padel sports, which would continue until 11 PM.

·                Previously, there was a  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6