Agenda, decisions and minutes

There were no apologies for absence.

There were no apologies for absence.

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.

There were no declarations of interest made during the meeting.

There were no declarations of interest made during the meeting.

This application proposes the demolition of the existing residential building and the construction of a new part five, part six storey residential building, together with associated landscaping, cycle parking and refuse and recycling facilities.

Granted planning permission subject to:

(1)  The prior completion of a s106 legal agreement to secure the planning obligations as detailed within the committee report.

(2)  The conditions and informatives, as detailed in the main and updated within the supplementary committee report, along with:

·       An amendment to condition 11 on the Draft Decision Notice (page 36 of the main committee report) which should refer to 23 residential dwellings within Use Class C3 rather than 33 residential dwellings.

PROPOSAL

Demolition of the existing residential building and the construction of a new part five, part six storey residential building, together with associated landscaping, cycle parking and refuse and recycling facilities.

RECOMMENDATION

That the Committee resolve to GRANT planning permission subject to:

(1)      The prior completion of a s106 legal agreement to secure the planning obligations as detailed within the committee report.

(2)      The conditions and informatives, as detailed in the main and updated within the supplementary committee report, along with:

Mahya Fatemi (Career Grade Planning Officer) introduced the planning application committee report, detailing the proposal for the demolition of the existing residential building and the construction of a new part five, part six storey residential building containing 23 flats (with one of the floors at basement level), together with associated landscaping, cycle parking and refuse and recycling facilities.

The accommodation would comprise 1 x studio flat; 5 x 1-bedroom flats;11 x 2-bedroom flats; and 6 x 3-bedroom flats.

It was highlighted that all homes would have private amenity spaces from 7 sqm in size. Communal external amenity space would be provided within a 201 sqm garden at ground level and 59 sqm roof terrace at fourth floor level. Cycle storage for 44 bicycles would be provided within an internal bike store and a bike enclosure within the ground floor communal amenity space, with both accessed from Willesden Lane. Refuse storage would also be provided within an internal store accessed from, Willesden Lane.

Attention was drawn to the supplementary report, detailing one further representation received in objection to the proposals since the publication of the committee report, amendments to the main report, and an amendment to condition 11 on the Draft Decision Notice (page 36 of the main committee report) which should refer to 23 residential dwellings within Use Class C3 rather than 33 residential dwellings. The recommendation remained to grant consent subject to the prior completion of a s106 legal agreement as well as the amended condition and informatives detailed in the main and updated within the supplementary committee report.

The Chair thanked Mahya Fatemi for introducing the report. As there were no Committee questions raised at this point, the Chair then invited Lewis Westhoff (who had registered to speak as the Applicants Agent) to address the Committee in relation to the application, who highlighted the following points:

•         Lewis Westhoff began by reminding the Committee of a meeting held in June 2022 to discuss a similar proposal for 66 Cavendish Road. Since permission had been granted for that proposal, it was noted that two key changes had occurred. Firstly, the owners had acquired an additional portion of land to the rear of 64 Cavendish Road, thereby enlarging the overall site area. Secondly, and more significantly, the owners had entered into a joint venture arrangement with Goldrose Sharpe Developments to execute the scheme. It was highlighted that Goldrose Sharpe, a North London-based SME developer, had a commendable track record of delivering small and medium-sized developments of this nature. It  ...  view the full minutes text for item 3.

This application proposes the erection of a part two storey and part single storey side extension; a single storey rear extension; hip-to-gable roof extension including rear dormer window and rooflights; gabled roof over side extension; and a front porch; partial demolition of garage; and conversion of the building into 2 self-contained flats (Part Retrospective, Part Proposed).

Granted planning permission subject to:

(1)      The conditions and informatives, as detailed in the main committee report.

PROPOSAL

Erection of a part two storey and part single storey side extension; a single storey rear extension; hip-to-gable roof extension including rear dormer window and rooflights; gabled roof over side extension; and a front porch; partial demolition of garage; and conversion of the building into 2 self-contained flats (Part Retrospective, Part Proposed)

RECOMMENDATION

That the Committee resolve to GRANT planning permission subject to:

(1)      The conditions and informatives, as detailed in the main committee report.

Brooke Storey Vowles (Career Grade Planning Officer) introduced the planning application committee report, detailing the proposal for the erection of a part two storey and part single storey side extension; a single storey rear extension; hip-to-gable roof extension including rear dormer window and rooflights; gabled roof over side extension; and a front porch; partial demolition of garage; and conversion of the building into 2 self-contained flats (Part Retrospective, Part Proposed).

Attention was drawn to the supplementary report, detailing two additional comments received since the publication of the committee report, which did not specifically raise an objection but were queries, and as such, the number of objections remained the same. The recommendation remained to grant consent subject to the conditions and informatives, as set out within the main committee report.

The Chair thanked Brooke Storey Vowles for introducing the report. As there were no Committee questions raised at this point, the Chair then invited William Avery (who had registered to speak as the applicant’s representative) to address the Committee in relation to the application, who highlighted the following points:

•         The application followed two highly productive pre-application processes and extensive dialogue with the case officer and the planning team.

•         In commending the hard work of the officers involved, it was asserted that there was nothing before the committee that, when considered in the context of the enforcement history and what were believed to be non-material unrelated objections, necessitated anything other than a straightforward delegated approval for the extensions to the house and the conversion already allowed via the appeal. However, the representative acknowledged and understood the community concerns.

•         The applicant representative reassured members that the applicant was committed to resolving previous breaches and to constructing the policy-compliant design. The permission was required for the property owner to begin rectifying the previous breaches, proceed with the building works, and move forward with their lives. The representative detailed that he had advised the applicant that the proposed design was entirely policy-compliant and expressed delight that the Local Planning Authority (LPA) concurred.

•         The change of use had already been established through the appeal. The quality of accommodation had been confirmed to be policy compliant. The existing deviation from the previously approved roof design had been rectified with the twin gable design, which was fully compliant with the Supplementary Planning Document (SPD). It was noted that there was no material change to the amenity impact when compared to the 2017 approval and the allowed appeal for application reference 2022/3944.

•         In concluding, the applicants representative detailed  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.

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.

There was no other urgent business.

There was no other urgent business.