Agenda, decisions and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Mahmood, Councillor Chappell attended as an alternate member.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Mahmood, Councillor Chappell attended as an alternate member.

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

In relation to Agenda Item 4, Councillor Begum advised that whilst one of the ward councillors for Kilburn she had not sought to take any position on the application and therefore felt able to consider the application impartially and without any form of predetermination.

In relation to Agenda Item 7, Councillor S.Butt also advised that as the ward councillor for Kingsbury he had been approached in relation to the application via casework, however he did not personally deal with the issue and therefore felt able to consider the application impartially and without any form of predetermination.

In relation to Agenda Item 4, Councillor Begum advised that whilst one of the ward councillors for Kilburn she had not sought to take any position on the application and therefore felt able to consider the application impartially and without any form of predetermination.

In relation to Agenda Item 7, Councillor S.Butt also advised that as the ward councillor for Kingsbury he had been approached in relation to the application via casework, however he did not personally deal with the issue and therefore felt able to consider the application impartially and without any form of predetermination.

To approve the minutes of the previous meeting held on Wednesday 18 October 2023 as a correct record.

RESOLVED that the minutes of the meeting held on Wednesday 18 October 2023 be approved as an accurate record of the meeting.

The minutes from the previous meeting held on Tuesday 24 October 2023 would be considered at the next Committee meeting.

RESOLVED that the minutes of the meeting held on Wednesday 18 October 2023 be approved as an accurate record of the meeting.

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

PROPOSAL

Demolition of Former Kilburn Square Clinic, 13-15 Brondesbury Road, substation, footbridge and garages and redevelopment of site to provide extra care flats (Use Class C3b) and general needs flats (Use Class C3)) in 4 buildings alongside access routes, car parking, motorcycle parking, cycle parking, refuse and recycling storage, amenity space, landscaping, playspace, boundary treatments, alterations to the entrance to Varley House, refurbishment of the existing podium parking area and other associated works.

RECOMMENDATION:

That the Committee resolve to GRANT planning permission subject to:

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

(2)      The Head of Planning being 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.

Curtis Thompson, Planning Officer, South Area Planning Team, introduced the report and set out the key issues. In introducing the report members were advised that the application would see the re-development of the site to provide 139 units within four blocks ranging between 5 and 8 storeys in height. The development would also see a range of associated works including access routes, car and motorcycle parking, cycle parking, refuse storage areas, amenity spaces, landscaping and boundary treatments.

It was clarified that where report paragraph 130 had referred to the volume of communal amenity space, the figure provided was actually in relation to the provision of play space, not the total amenity space.

The Chair thanked Curtis Thompson for introducing the report.  As there were no Committee questions raised at this point, the Chair invited the first speakers Margaret Von Stoll (objector) and Zahia Allawa (objector) to address the Committee (in person) in relation to the application, as Ms Von Stoll and Ms Allawa had indicated that they were sharing the allocated time slot, the Chair agreed for them to address the Committee consecutively with Ms Von Stoll speaking for 2 minutes and Ms Allawa speaking for 1 minute. Ms Von Stoll introduced herself as a member of the Kilburn Village Residents Association (KVRA) before she proceeded to highlight the following key points:

·                There had been significant dialogue between the KVRA and the applicant’s team in an attempt to compromise on a scheme acceptable to existing local residents.  Despite these attempts, however, it was felt that the scheme presented to the Committee represented overdevelopment and lacked community support.

·                It was felt that a smaller scheme that comprised of Blocks A and B would be acceptable as it would still support the provision of new homes in Brent without the need to remove trees and green  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.

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

PROPOSAL

Demolition of one bungalow and various infill developments to deliver 21 residential units (Use Class C3) consisting of five separate developments of two terraces and three flatted blocks, with associated car parking, cycle storage, and enhancements to the Estate’s amenity space.

RECOMMENDATION:

That the Committee resolve to GRANT planning permission subject to:

(1)      The Head of Planning being 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 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.

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

Neil Quinn, Principal Planning Officer, South Area Planning Team, introduced the report and set out the key issues. In introducing the report members were advised that the existing site comprised of a large residential estate, providing a mix of 2 and 3 storey flatted blocks, bungalows and maisonettes. The estate was not in a conservation area nor was it listed or in close proximity to a listed building. The proposed application sought the demolition of one bungalow to provide a net increase of 20 homes.

The Chair thanked Neil Quinn for introducing the report, as there were no Committee questions raised at this point, the Chair invited the first speaker Ms Deborah Eppel (objector) to address the Committee (in person) in relation to the application.

The following key points were highlighted:

·                Concerns were raised that the application failed to comply with national and local planning guidelines, including policy SPD1 and a breach of the 18m minimum separation distance, whereby some new properties would only be 14m away. It was felt this would create overlooking and was in conflict with Article 8 of the Human Rights Act, which states that a person had the right to respect for their private and family lives.

·                The application breached BRE targets in the case of 50 Milverton Road and 12 flats in Clement Close.

·                The Committee report stated that the rooms impacted were 10 sqm kitchens and therefore were too small to be considered habitable. This was felt to be inaccurate as many of the 10 sqm kitchens doubled up as dining rooms.

·                The scheme was not policy compliant in terms of affordable housing provision.

·                Concerns were raised that the calculations used in the application were inaccurate, notably: the Urban Greening Factor (UGF) calculation, which was believed to be lower than calculated  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

Granted planning permission subject to the conditions and informatives as set out in the Committee report and supplementary report; and the Committee’s recommendation that the Transport Team explore the practicalities of increasing parking provision through the use of diagonal parking bays.

PROPOSAL

Demolition of all garages on site to provide five new homes with associated cycle and refuse storage, resurfacing of Newland Court to provide shared vehicular and pedestrian surface, provision of on-street car parking along Newland Court, new refuse storage facilities to serve existing residents at Newland Court and all associated landscaping works (revised scheme)

RECOMMENDATION:

That the Committee resolve to GRANT planning permission subject to:

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

(2)      That the Head of Planning 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.

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

Nicola Blake, Principal Planning Officer, North Area Planning Team, introduced the repot and set out the key issues. In introducing the report members were advised that the proposed application sought the demolition of all the garages on site to provide five new family sized homes. The application site comprised of 34 garages across the northern side of the service road of Newland Court. The site was adjacent to Barnhill Conservation Area, a designated heritage asset. The section of Forty Avenue that fronted Newland Court was designated as an Intensification Corridor within Brent’s Local Plan and to the east of the application was the boundary of the Wembley Growth Area.

The Chair thanked Nicola Blake for introducing the report, as there were no Committee questions raised at this point, the Chair invited the first speaker Mr Marc Etukudo (objector) to address the Committee (in person) in relation to the application.

The following key points were highlighted:

·                Concerns were raised that objections made in relation to specific queries had been ignored by officers.

·                It was felt that the proposed application had been based on misinformation and unreliable, out-dated reports in order to fast track the application.

·                It was felt that the Council’s Ecological Report was flawed and inaccurate as there were discrepancies in the report in relation to ecological surveys undertaken.

·                Concerns were raised that a follow up ecological report advising that the bat surveys were conducted at the wrong time of year and which had identified species of bats (protected by the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 and regulations Act 1984) found in the trees by the garages had not been considered by officers.

·                Concerns were raised that a number of trees in the Arboricultural Report had  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

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

PROPOSAL

Retrospective application for retention of single storey rear extension with patio and hip to gable roof extension with rear dormer and three front rooflights to the existing dwellinghouse including proposed construction of new two storey dwellinghouse adjacent to 1 Hillside with rear dormer and juliet balcony roof extensions, new front rooflights, subdivision of rear garden, front boundary treatment, relocation and extension to vehicle crossover for off-street car parking spaces, associated landscaping, cycle and refuse storage.

RECOMMENDATION:

That the Committee resolve to GRANT planning permission subject to:

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

Jasmin Tailor, Planning Officer, North Area Planning Team, introduced the report and set out the key issues. In introducing the report members were advised that the application site related to a two storey semi-detached dwellinghouse, located on the western side of Hillside, Kingsbury. The existing dwellinghouse was located in a residential area and was currently undergoing building works to include a single storey rear extension and other roof extensions and alterations. The application site also included land to the north which was within the ownership of the applicant but outside the curtilage of the existing dwellinghouse.

The Chair thanked Jasmin Tailor for introducing the report, as there were no questions from the Committee at this stage, the Chair proceeded to invite the first speaker on the item Christine Kingham (objector) to address the Committee (online) in relation to the application.

The following key points were highlighted:

·                Local residents strongly objected to the proposed new build.

·                The Public Transport Accessibility Level (PTAL) for this location did not align with the appropriate standards for new builds. As an area with a PTAL rating of 2, it was not a priority area for targeting new housing.

·                As outlined in UK planning laws, adherence to PTAL requirements was crucial to ensuring sustainable and accessible developments. The proposed project, falling short in this regard, raised concerns about the potential strain on transportation, infrastructure and accessibility with housing developments in Hillside previously refused on this basis.

·                Existing car parking issues would be exacerbated by the addition of a further household.

·                The proposal to create a terrace row of houses contradicted the existing neighbourhood structure, which primarily consists of semi-detached houses. This terracing effect would disrupt the harmonious architectural layout and character of the community.

·                Queries were raised in relation to the boundary lines of the proposed development.

·                Urban Greening had not been considered in the report, nor had the applicant submitted information to comply with policy D12A for fire safety, therefore posing a risk.

·                On the basis of the concerns raised, Ms Kingham urged the Committee to reject the application.

The Chair thanked Christine Kingham for addressing the Committee and asked the Committee if they had any questions or clarifying points to raise, the Committee raised queries in relation to the perceived strain on local transport, the style of housing and the boundary issues raised  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

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 9:36pm

COUNCILLOR KELCHER

Chair