Agenda, decisions and minutes

Apologies were received from Councillor Begum, Councillor Kabir attended as a substitute member.

Apologies were received from Councillor Begum, Councillor Kabir attended as a substitute member.

Members are invited to declare at this stage of the meeting, the nature and existence of any relevant disclosable pecuniary, personal or prejudicial interests in the items on this agenda and to specify the item(s) to which they relate.

Councillor Butt advised that he had been present at a meeting in 2021 where initial plans for Item 4 – Rokesby Place development were discussed. The Committee agreed this was not a conflict of interest, therefore Councillor Butt remained and fully participated in the meeting.

Councillor Butt advised that he had been present at a meeting in 2021 where initial plans for Item 4 – Rokesby Place development were discussed. The Committee agreed this was not a conflict of interest, therefore Councillor Butt remained and fully participated in the meeting.

To approve the minutes of the previous meeting held on Wednesday 13 July 2022 as a correct record.

RESOLVED that the minutes of the previous meeting held on Wednesday 13^th July 2022 be approved as an accurate record of the meeting.

RESOLVED that the minutes of the previous meeting held on 13 July 2022 be approved as an accurate record of the meeting.

Granted planning permission subject to the conditions and informatives set out in the report with amendments to condition 15 (hard and soft landscaping scheme) to include the need for consideration to be given to disabled access from within the application sites to the site boundaries, and opportunities to enhance the soft landscaping provision within the private gardens of the new homes.

PROPOSAL

Development of car park next to 34 Rokesby Place to create 2 x four bedroom dwellings with associated  cycle and refuse storage, landscaping and reconfigured car parking area providing five new car parking spaces.

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.

(3)   That the Committee confirms that adequate provision has been made, by the imposition of conditions and obligations, for the preservation or planting of trees as required by Section 197 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

Victoria McDonagh, Team Leader, North Area, Development Planning Team introduced the report and set out the key issues. In introducing the report members were advised that the site was on a private residential car park to the northern side of 34 Rokesby Place with approximately 12 parking spaces  referred to as Site A. Site B, adjacent to 31 Rokesby Place was predominantly soft landscaping with 2 informal parking spaces and clothes drying facilities for residents. CGI slides were shown to the Committee to give greater context as to how the proposed development would look upon completion. The Committee were advised that the proposed development would see 2 x 4 bed homes on Site A with communal amenity space. Site B would see additional car parking and further enhancements to the remainder of the amenity space. There was no supplementary report to consider, however comments had been received from the Rokesby Residents Association in relation to fire safety concerns.

As no Committee questions were raised at this point, the Chair invited Zahida Khan (as an objector) to address the Committee (in person) in relation to the application.

Ms Khan introduced herself to the Committee and explained that she was representing her disabled mother who had been a resident of Rokesby Place for a number of years. Ms Khan shared the family’s concerns as follows -

• The informal car parking area was frequently used by carers and other health professionals who supported Ms Khan’s mother’s daily health needs. The family were concerned that the loss of these parking spaces to make way for the new development would have a detrimental effect on residents who required visitors to support their needs and could potentially impact the care received.
• Further concerns were raised that in general terms if there was limited parking, family and friends would not  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.

Granted planning permission subject to the conditions and informatives set out in the report and additional conditions that were verbally updated within the meeting, to ensure the demolition of the existing outbuilding and to prevent the properties from being converted into small HMOs without planning permission..

PROPOSAL

Proposed conversion of single dwelling house into two self contained flats, associated internal alterations, subdivision of rear garden, removal of rear outbuilding, partial removal of side extension, installation of refuse storage and cycle storage in front garden, front boundary treatment, associated hard and soft 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 Team, introduced the report and set out the key issues. In introducing the report members were advised that the application proposed the conversion of a single dwelling house into two self contained flats, 1x 1 bed flat and 1x 3 bed flat. Member’s attention was drawn to the supplementary report that detailed further objections that had been received   from residents who had previously objected. The objections related to the impact of the construction work, the principle of the development, parking and bin and cycle storage. These points had been addressed by officers in the Committee Report consultation section. In addition to this a further condition would be discussed with the Committee with regard to the dwelling not being used as an HMO.

As no questions were raised by members, the Chair invited Mr Anthony Modeste (objector) to address the Committee (online) in relation to the application. Mr Modeste introduced himself as the home owner of the neighbouring property to 69 Hardinge Road then shared his concerns as follows:

·       Historically the residents of 69 Hardinge Road had not adhered to the planning laws or building regulations in relation to previous work carried out on the property.

·       The quality of work completed had reportedly been to a poor standard Mr Modeste drew member’s attention to the photos he had provided to the Committee that demonstrated the quality of work previously undertaken.

·       Concerns was shared that the poor quality of work impacted upon neighbouring properties and potentially their value.

·       Due to the poor work that had been previously undertaken, Mr Modeste felt there was encroachment on to the party wall of his property.

·       Due to concerns that the applicant was not being transparent with his intentions for the adaptations to the property, Mr Modeste was concerned that the property could become an HMO.

·       Mr Modeste felt that the proposed changes to the property would not encourage families to the area as families would not want to live in  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

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

PROPOSAL

Erection of a new commercial building to provide flexible commercial floorspace (Use Class E), together with soft and hard landscaping, cycle and car parking and associated works.

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 Team, introduced the report and set out the key issues. In introducing the report members were advised that the application site was located to the rear of the NW Works within Quadrant Business Centre, which comprised of 58,000 sqm of commercial floor space and 12 residential units. The site was currently being used as a car park and was not situated within a Conservation Area. Member’s attention was drawn to an amendment to one of the conditions to allow the applicant to start the foundations work before the materials were submitted.

As there were no questions for the officers at this stage, the Chair invited Mr Peter Rhodes OBE (objector) to address the Committee (online) in relation to the application. Mr Rhodes introduced himself and informed the Committee that he was representing 9 of the flat owners/residents of Quantic House, the residential building located within NW Works. It was noted that the 2 flats not represented were owned by the applicant. The following key points were shared:

·       Residents felt there had been a lack of consideration and consultation with Quantic House residents, particularly in light of them sharing the same vehicular and pedestrian gated access off Salusbury Road.

·       Quantic House had experienced serious security issues that residents feared would be exacerbated if the new development was approved.  The issues involved unauthorised distribution of the gate codes by non-residential personnel, this had resulted in multiple thefts and attempts to break in to resident’s cars on the Quantic House car park.

·       Residents were concerned that the additional distribution of the gate codes required during the construction phase of the development and to the future commercial tenants would undoubtedly exacerbate the security risk to the residents of Quantic House and their property.

·       Waste issues were highlighted as a problem for residents as commercial tenants were using the Quantic House residential rubbish storage, causing an overflow to the private waste disposal area. The erection of a new development in NW Works and the presence of additional tenants would worsen the issue.

·       Residents were unhappy with the loss  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

Notice of items to be raised under this heading must be given in writing to the Head of Executive and Member Services or his representative before the meeting in accordance with Standing Order 60.

None.

None.

The meeting closed at 8:11pm.

COUNCILLOR KELCHER

Chair