Agenda, decisions and minutes

Newfield Primary School, Newfield Nursery & Mission Dine Club

Councillor Adeyeye declared a personal interest that he knew the operator of Mission Dine Club.  He left the meeting room and did not take part in the discussion and voting on this item. 

Councillor Long declared a prejudicial interest that she was a member of Brent Housing Partnership (BHP) Board.  She left the meeting room and did not take part in the discussion and voting on this item.

Cambridge Court, Cambridge avenue, Ely Court, Chichester Avenue & Wells Court, Coventry Close, London NW6

Councillor Long declared a prejudicial interest that she was a member of Brent Housing Partnership (BHP) Board.  She left the meeting room and did not take part in the discussion and voting on this item.

Storage land next to 75, St Pauls Avenue, London NW6

Councillor Cummins declared a prejudicial interest that he was a director of a subsidiary company of Genesis Housing, the applicant.  He left the meeting room and did not take part in the discussion and voting on this item.

Land next to 10, Tillet Close, London NW10

Councillor Long declared a prejudicial interest that she was a member of Brent Housing Partnership (BHP) Board.  She left the meeting room and did not take part in the discussion and voting on this item.

RESOLVED:-

that the minutes of the previous meeting held on 23 February 2011 be approved as an accurate record of the meeting.

Granted planning permission, subject to an appropriate form of Agreement in order to secure the measures set out in the Section 106 Details section of this report

or

If within a reasonable period the applicant fails to enter into an appropriate agreement in order to meet the policies of the Unitary Development Plan, Core Strategy and Section 106 Planning Obligations Supplementary Planning Document, to delegate authority to the Head of Area Planning, or other duly authorised person, to refuse planning permission.

This application was deferred from the Planning Committee meeting held on 23 February 2011 in order to allow additional consultation to take place, specifically with the Mission Dine Community Centre who indicated that they were not aware of the planning application.

Andy Bates, the Area Planning Manager drew members’ attention to amendments to proposed conditions 3, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9 suggested by the Director of Legal and Procurement as set out in the tabled supplementary report to be attached to any permission. Subject to the above he reiterated the recommendation for approval subject to a Section 106 legal agreement.

Mr Patrick Anderson speaking in objection to the application and on behalf of Mission Dine Club (MDC) occupiers of the premises in Fry Road stated that the recommendation for approval would be contrary to the Council’s Unitary Development (UDP) Policy PPS 12 which acknowledged the need to protect the elderly and disabled persons.  He continued that MDC was concerned that its removal from the Fry Road premises would be detrimental to the elderly and disabled group of persons, particularly women and children from the black minority ethnic groups.  In response to a member’s question, Mr Anderson stated that MDC’s lease for the premises was not due to expire until at a later date this year.

Dame Betty Asafo-Agyei, the operator of MDC speaking in objection to the application stated that the grant of planning permission would result in a detrimental impact on the elderly and the youth who were using the club as a focal point of interaction.  She referred to the successful work of MDC within the community which she said had prompted local multi-national organisations such as IKEA to provide funding.  She added that although MDC had a 30 year lease of the premises, it was varied by the Council to 7 years without prior knowledge of MDC.  Dame Asafo-Agyei urged members to refuse the application so as to enable MDC to carry out its charitable work to the elderly and the youth particularly from those from the minority ethnic group.

Mrs Aileen Thomas the applicant’s agent drew members’ attention to the Borough’s shortage of school  ...  view the full minutes text for item 3.

Grant planning permission subject to conditions and informatives.

With reference to the tabled supplementary report, Rachel McConnell, the Area Planning Manager, informed the Committee that following the publication of the report, the applicant had submitted an Arboricultural Method Statement in accordance with the requirements of Condition 6.  Following a review of the information submitted, the Council's Landscape Officer considered that the detail provided was acceptable to meet the requirements of the proposed condition. Rachel McConnell recommended an amendment to Condition 6 requiring compliance with the information submitted.  She also recommended an additional condition (7) as set out in the tabled supplementary report in order to secure the provision of the 6 semi-mature trees to the west of the development.

Mr Barry Kruger an objector stated that the proposal could lead to an increase in activities and traffic would also result in loss of aspect and views.  He requested that appropriate conditions be imposed to ensure that adverse impact in terms of amenities and traffic which could result was minimised.

Rachel McConnell, Area Planning Manager, advised that there would be a charge payable for community access in line with Brent’s standard charge for such facilities.

The Head of Area Planning advised that some of the issues raised by the objector were a matter for Parks Service Management.  He undertook to inform them accordingly.

Grant planning permission subject to conditions.

Grant planning permission subject to conditions.

Steve Weeks, Head of Area Planning recommended an amendment to condition 5 as set out in the tabled supplementary report in order to ensure a high quality of design that preserved or enhanced the character and appearance of the Mount Stewart Conservation Area.

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 or other authorised person to agree the exact terms thereof on advice from the Director of Legal and Procurement.

Rachel McConnell, Area Planning Manager, referred to a list of concerns raised by a neighbour in respect of residential amenity, parking and traffic congestion.   She stated that matters relating to transportation, residential amenity and design had been assessed in the main report and significant weight should be given to the Planning Inspectorates decision on previous applications.  She continued that the Council's Transportation Officer had not raised objection regarding resultant congestion in the area as the on-site parking provision and turning areas were considered to be acceptable.  Members noted that Thames Water had raised no objection to the proposal.

Dr Qasi Jalisi, in objecting on behalf of the adjoining resident, raised concerns on the following grounds;

a)        Car parking problems would result from the insufficient and narrow entrance to the site.

b)        Environmental problems would result from increased prospect of blocked drains that could frequently occur.

c)         The location for bin storage to the front of the site would also result in environmental problems.

Mr G Naidoo the applicant’s agent stated that the current scheme had addressed all significant concerns expressed on the previous scheme.  He stated that the design quality of the building had been improved by the use of high quality materials and that parking provision complied with the council’s parking standards.  He added that surveys conducted had shown that there was no soil contamination on the site and that Thames Water had raised no objection to the scheme.

Grant planning permission subject to conditions.

Andy Bates confirmed that the character of the area including Dyne Road and both sides of Kilburn High Road had been taken into account in recommending approval of the application subject to conditions.  He added that enforcement of parking controls applied in the Kilburn High Road area.

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.

With reference to the tabled supplementary report Andy Bates, Area Planning Manager clarified the following issues that were raised at the site visit by members and local residents;

Ownership of open spaces & access

Currently, Alpha Place and Gorefield Place, the local access roads on the site, were estate roads and as they were not adopted highway they were maintained through local service charges to tenants and leaseholders. All new roads to be constructed as part of the proposal would be built to adoptable standards and maintained by the Council following completion. He added that the pedestrian footpath across the site was not intended as designated Public Rights of Way, although the public would have informal access to it.

Funding and tenure

The sale of the application site would provide sufficient funding for both the replacement affordable housing on the subject site and the construction of the proposed affordable housing scheme on the Bond/Hicks Bolton site, for which the planning application was likely to be considered in May of this year. He advised that if the current scheme were not to go ahead then it would have a direct impact on the viability of future phases of the South Kilburn Regeneration programme.

Loss of affordable units

The current proposal would involve the re-provision of 58 affordable units on the site, a net loss of 2 units as a direct result of this development.

Physical relationship between buildings

The proposed mews blocks would be sited so that they would only partially face the south-eastern facade of Alpha House, at either end, and where they would directly face one another, a distance of some 7m would be maintained. The siting of the proposed mews blocks would limit blocks directly facing each other, thus preventing unreasonable harm to the outlook from habitable room windows on the south eastern facade of Alpha House. In addition, all habitable room windows to the proposed mews blocks had been orientated in order to prevent direct overlooking of the south-eastern facade of Alpha House.  He continued that whilst the link block may be visible at an angle from windows to the front and rear of Gorefield  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9.

Grant planning permission subject to conditions.

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 the Area Planning Manager in responding to objectors’ claim about lack of consultation informed the Committee that the revisions to the application in respect of the area to the ground floor front of the site was not of a scale that warranted any re-consultation with interested parties.  With reference to the tabled supplementary report he responded to the following concerns by objectors and Councillor Lesley Jones, ward member:

The limitations of the site were considered to be acceptably addressed and on balance the form of the proposed building would relate acceptably to the streetscene while maintaining pedestrian safety with a designated and defined route.  With respect to the concern about the quality and appearance of the proposed white rockwool/rockpanel cladding, the Area Planning Manager stated that a sample of this would be required by condition to ensure a high standard of development which reflected the surrounding character would be achieved.  In respect of the road layout, he stated that Highways Engineers having considered the revised road layout of this application concluded that the designation of a pedestrian route to the entrance had removed the potential conflicts identified by the inspector.  In addition, the siting of the disabled parking space was not objected to as visibility through the site was considered to be acceptable.

Andy Bates continued that the inspector found that habitable accommodation within the proposed development could be reasonably protected from the garage noise by design and glazing as could the balconies by some kind of screening. In respect of flooding he stated that a condition as suggested by Thames Water was recommended to be addressed by the applicant before work commenced. He reiterated the recommendation for approval subject to conditions and a Section 106 legal agreement.

Mrs BA Glynn in objecting to the proposed development started by saying that the consultation with residents was inadequate.  She continued that the proposal would result in an adverse impact on the residents due to conflicts between vehicles and pedestrians, unacceptable road layout which would encourage speeding traffic and overall noise nuisance.  She added that Genesis Housing Group had agreed to a mediation to take place in April with residents with a view to addressing the concerns raised and urged members to defer the application until after the meeting had taken place.

Ms Jennifer Cameron an objector speaking in a similar vein claimed that the consultation with residents was inadequate for a development which in her view would have an adverse impact on the Victorian enclave by encouraging graffiti and resulting in loss of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 11.

Grant planning permission subject to the completion of a satisfactory Section 106 or other legal agreement and conditions and delegate authority to the Head of Area Planning to agree the exact terms thereof on advice from the Director of Legal and Procurement.

With reference to the tabled supplementary report, the Head of Area planning responded to the following issues raised by members at the site visit:

In respect of affordable housing he stated that the applicants would be required to submit an affordable housing toolkit with the actual build costs and sales values which may result in increased value. He continued that the provision for 4 parking spaces in front of the development would be laid out in accordance with approved details under new condition 22.  It was noted that the agreed acoustic report was considered satisfactory as was the location of the accessible bin store.  He added that an appointed ecologist had considered the scheme and concluded that no building would be close to the Wealdstone Brook Ecology.  This coupled with appropriately landscaped area by the stream would provide a buffer, with a communal amenity area further away. The Head of Area Planning advised members that although the area did not have an industrial past in accordance with PPS23 guidelines, officers recommended a remediation condition to ensure that it would be suitable for the residential flats proposed.

Grant planning permission subject to the completion of a satisfactory Section 106 or other 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.

This application was recommended for deferral to allow further revisions to the design and layout of the scheme in order to address the relationship between the proposed houses and their gardens with the banked area to the south of the site, and to amend the provision of external amenity space.

Steve Weeks informed the Committee that the applicants had since revised the proposal to alter the relationship, and had incorporated other associated changes to the scheme including better lighting, wider footprint, significantly improved roof spaces and frontage. 

Members welcomed the report however Councillor Cummins stated that the presentation could have been enhanced with photographs, a view that was echoed by Councillor Adeyeye.

Note: Councillor Long declared a prejudicial interest that she was a member of Brent Housing Partnership (BHP) Board.  She left the meeting room and did not take part in the discussion and voting on this item.

Noted.

RESOLVED:

that the appeals for February 2011 be noted.

None.

The meeting ended at 9:30pm

RS PATEL

Chair