Agenda, decisions and minutes
Venue: Committee Rooms 1, 2 and 3, Brent Town Hall, Forty Lane, Wembley, HA9 9HD. View directions
Contact: Joe Kwateng, Democratic Services Officer Email: joe.kwateng@brent.gov.uk, (020) 8937 1354
No. | Item | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
Declarations of personal and prejudicial interests Members are invited to declare at this stage of the meeting, any relevant financial or other interest in the items on this agenda. Decision: None. Minutes: None declared.
|
||||
Minutes of the previous meeting PDF 125 KB Decision: Agreed as an accurate record. Minutes: RESOLVED:-
that the minutes of the previous meeting held on 2 August 2011 be approved as an accurate record of the meeting. |
||||
8 St Pauls Avenue, London, NW2 5SX (Ref. 10/3157) PDF 296 KB Decision: Planning permission granted 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. Minutes:
Andy Bates (Area Planning Manager) stated that in order to preserve the amenity and privacy of neighbouring residential occupiers, an additional condition, on access to the roof as set out in the tabled supplementary report, had been added.
|
||||
1-3, The Mall, Harrow, HA3 (Ref 11/1649) PDF 854 KB Decision: Granted variation of condition 2 as proposed and a new permission issued. Minutes:
|
||||
Flats G06 & G07, Jubilee Heights, Shoot Up Hill, London, NW2 3BD (Ref. 11/1672 ) PDF 696 KB Decision: (a) 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 (b) 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. Minutes:
|
||||
86 Wrentham Avenue, London, NW10 3HG Ref. 11/1528) PDF 288 KB Decision: Refused planning permission. Minutes:
Andy Bates, Area Planning Manager, referred to a submission by the applicant’s agent that sought to refute the contents of the committee report and which concluded that the proposal would comply with the adopted planning policy of the Council. In his view the agent’s statement did not raise any new issues, but indicated that the 3D comparison between existing and proposed situations showed that the changes proposed were significant.
Ms Mary Power, the applicant’s agent in clarifying her reasons for refuting the reasons for refusal submitted the following;
(i) The property was not locally listed or located within a Conservation Area and as such the building and its location would have no statutory protection to preserve or enhance its special architectural or historic interest.
(ii) The Council’s designation of Areas of Distinctive Residential Character was for the purpose of recognising the contribution of streets and buildings including the quality of buildings, materials and trees that were assessed within the public realm and public spaces. The application and its impact should be judged from the streets along Wrentham Avenue. As the proposed roof extension would not be seen from the pavements of Wrentham Avenue, the proposal would have no impact on the Area of Distinctive Residential Character.
(iii) The scheme had been revised following comments by officers and neighbours by removing a roof level balcony and terrace, reducing the bulk of the roof extension and retaining many of the buildings key features of interest.
She continued that the extension was proposed in order to accommodate existing residents growing family needs and their desire to stay within the Borough and sustainably extend the home with no arising impacts. Ms Power added that the alterations would not materially impact on sunlight/daylight to the adjoining neighbour at 88 Wrentham Avenue and complied with SPG5 in allowing for changes and comprehensive change to roof spaces subject to high quality design.
In the discussion that followed, Councillor Cummins stated that as the parapet wall would not be visible from the street he did not support the reasons for recommending refusal. In response Steve Weeks, Head of Area Planning, stated that in connection specifically with the parapet wall proposed on the roof it would be over 7 metres in length and would be approximately 1.1 metres higher than the roof on the adjoining attached property. Whilst not visible from the street, the parapet wall would be visible from a good distance away and given the long rear gardens of adjoining properties and the changes proposed, would not respect the character of the building in this Area of Distinctive Residential Character (ADRC)
|
||||
Land next to 35, Chamberlayne Road, London, NW10 (Ref.11/1287) PDF 337 KB Decision: Planning permission granted 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. Minutes:
Andy Bates, Area Planning Manager, clarified the differences between this application and the scheme under planning reference 06/2993 as follows: an increase in the number of flats from 44 units to 50 units and change of unit mix from 11 x one-bedroom flats, 21 x two-bedroom flats, 5 x three-bedroom flats and 7 x four-bedroom flats. He continued that further detail which would have been required by conditions had been provided on the following issues:
a) Electric car charging points b) Materials c) Landscaping d) Noise insulation e) Refuse and recycling storage and collection
In view of the above, Andy Bates stated that conditions 2 and 5 had been amended and conditions 8 and 9 deleted as amplified in the tabled supplementary report.
|
||||
Maple Walk School, Crownhill Road, London, NW10 4EB (Ref. 11/1488 ) PDF 789 KB Decision: Planning permission granted subject to conditions. Minutes:
|
||||
Cedars Nursing Home, 24-26 Craven Park & 1 Craven Road, London, NW10 8RR (Ref 11/1691) PDF 846 KB Decision: Planning permission granted subject to the completion of a satisfactory Section 106 or other legal agreement and delegate authority to the Head of Planning to agree the exact terms thereof on advice from the Director of Legal and Procurement. Minutes:
Neil McClellan in updating members on the details of the Section 106 agreement stated that the proposal would result in a net increase of 25 bedrooms. As the standard approach to both care home and hotel development was to seek Section 106 contribution of £1500 per new bedroom the proposal would result in the requirement for a contribution of £37,500. He added that the applicant’s agent had confirmed agreement in principle to this contribution.
|
||||
Preston Manor High School, Carlton Avenue East, Wembley, HA9 8NA (Ref.11/1822) PDF 847 KB Decision: a) Granted planning permission, subject to a s106 legal agreement, or
(b) If within a reasonable period the applicant fails to demonstrate the ability to provide for the s106 terms and meet the policies of the Unitary Development Plan, Core Strategy and Section 106 Planning Obligations Supplementary Planning Document by concluding an appropriate agreement, to delegate authority to the Head of Area Planning, or other duly authorised person, to refuse planning permission. Minutes:
Neil McClellan, Area Planning Manager, informed the Committee that subject to increasing cycle parking provision and an update to the School Travel Plan no objections were raised by the Transportation section. He added that these matters had been fully addressed in the original committee report. He continued that whilst there would be a marginal change in re-levelling the pitch, it was not considered to impact on the amenities of adjoining occupiers.
Neil McClellan also informed members that the applicant had provided a summary that explained the differences between the light spill and glare levels and the different light settings required for hockey compared to other sports. He added that the floodlights would remain switched off when the pitches were not in use. The Area Planning Manager drew members’ attention to revisions to conditions 4 and 10 as set out in the tabled supplementary report and to revisions to conditions 3 and 8 as suggested by the Council’s legal officer.
Mr Chris Musto in objecting to the scheme expressed concerns that the floodlighting would adversely impact on the quality of life of adjoining occupiers, adding that the area was not large enough to absorb the impact particularly on an overcast day. He stated that he lived at 25 Holycroft Avenue which abuts the school’s playing fields. In addition to its adverse impact on outlook and noise nuisance that would result from the use of the pitches, Mr Musto stated that due to its close proximity to adjoining properties, the proposal would result in visual intrusion. He submitted that the floodlighting was unnecessary and urged members to refuse the application. He compared the proposal to the Vale Farm sports complex where he felt the floodlighting was a nuisance to local residents.
Mr Ben Lesley, the applicant’s agent gave detailed technical information on the specifications of the floodlights adding that its horizontal fitting would reduce glare intensity to acceptable environmental limits. He continued that the design of its vertical illumination would ensure minimal impact. In conclusion, Mr Lesley assured the Committee that a survey would be conducted following the installation of the floodlights to ensure that they are operating within agreed limitations.
The Area Planning Manager stated that whilst the floodlights would be visible from the rear gardens of neighbouring properties there would be very little direct light pollution. The occupants ... view the full minutes text for item 10. |
||||
Decision: Planning permission granted 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. Minutes:
Neil McClellan, Area Planning Manager, drew members’ attention to the tabled supplementary report that set out minor amendments to conditions 6 and 9 and the deletion of 2.
|
||||
Decision: Planning permission granted for the variation of condition 3 of consent reference 04/2158. Minutes:
|
||||
Land site of Shubette House, 5 Olympic Way, Wembley (Ref. 11/1145) PDF 429 KB Decision: Planning permission granted 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. Minutes:
|
||||
Planning Appeals June - July 2011 PDF 48 KB Additional documents:
Decision: Noted. Minutes: RESOLVED:-
That the appeals for June – July 2011 be noted.
|
||||
Any Other Urgent Business Notice of items to be raised under this heading must be given in writing to the Democratic Services Manager or his representative before the meeting in accordance with Standing Order 64.
Minutes: None. |
||||