Agenda, decisions and minutes

No apologies for absence were received at the meeting.

No apologies for absence were received at the meeting.

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 (Application 25/0413 – Matalan Discount Club, Cricklewood Broadway, London, NW2 6PH) all members of the Committee confirmed they had received an approach from the applicants agent but had not engaged in discussion on the application or sought to take any position on the application and therefore felt able to consider the application impartially and without any form of predetermination.

No other declarations of interest were made during the meeting.

In relation to Agenda Item 4 (Application 25/0413 – Matalan Discount Club, Cricklewood Broadway, London, NW2 6PH) all members of the Committee confirmed they had received an approach from the applicants agent but had not engaged in discussion on the application or sought to take any position on the application and therefore felt able to consider the application impartially and without any form of predetermination.

No other declarations of interest were made during the meeting.

RESOLVED that the minutes of the previous meetings held on Wednesday 11 June 2025 be approved as a correct record of the meeting.

RESOLVED:-

That the minutes of the previous meetings held on Wednesday 11 June 2025, be approved as a correct record of the meeting.

Councillor Kelcher (as Chair) advised that given the number of requests to speak received in relation to Application 25/0938 - 81 Balmoral Road, Willesden, NW2 5BH (listed as Agenda Item 6) he intended to change the order of the agenda, with that item to be considered following Application 25/0413 - Matalan Discount Club, Cricklewood Broadway, London, NW2 6PH.

The minutes therefore reflect the order in which items were considered at the meeting.

Granted planning permission subject to:

(1)       The applications referral to the Mayor of London (Stage 2 referral) and the prior completion of a satisfactory Section 106 legal agreement to secure the planning obligations as detailed within the main committee report.

(2)       The conditions and informatives, as set out in the main and updated within the supplementary committee report.

PROPOSAL

Demolition of the existing building and erection of 2 buildings ranging from 3 to 9 storeys comprising student bed spaces and ancillary facilities with commercial floorspace on the ground floor. 

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 main committee report.

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

Lena Summers (Principal Planning Officer) introduced the report, detailing that the site sat at the western side of Cricklewood Broadway and was bordered by Longley Way to the north and Temple Road to the south.  The proposal was for the demolition of the existing Matalan building and the erection of two buildings ranging up to 9 storeys predominantly for purpose-built student accommodation housing 826 bed spaces alongside two commercial units; one along Cricklewood Broadway and a smaller unit along Longley Way.  The development comprised a private courtyard and a publicly accessed pedestrian street running north and south between the two blocks.

Attention was drawn to the Supplementary Report detailing revisions in the plans and elevations including a reduction in the massing of the building to the western side, as well as a revised roof profile, the enlargement of cycle storage, reduction of the post room and updated landscaping along Temple Road, which would allow retention of the existing parking alignment.

The Chair thanked Lena Summers for introducing the report.  As there were no Committee questions raised at this point, the Chair then moved on to the representatives who had registered to speak in relation to the application. 

The Chair advised that as he had been informed (prior to the meeting) that the first speaker Lauren McLaughlin (who had registered to speak online in support of the application) had been unable to join the meeting due to travel disruption we had asked for the representations submitted to be read out on her behalf by the Governance Team at the meeting with the following points highlighted:

• The Committee was advised that Lauren McLaughlin lived a few streets away from the current Matalan site, having resided in the area for 5 years and deeply cared about the future of the neighbourhood.

• Expressing her full support for the planning application for Stoll Square, she had felt the application represented a considered and thoughtful proposal that would significantly enhance the local area.

• Currently, the site was disused and run-down and was not felt to contribute anything positive to the community, having become a hotspot for littering and fly-tipping with the feeling of being neglected.

• In contrast, the new development included green spaces, environmentally conscious materials and public areas that local residents could actually use and enjoy.  It was felt the plans showed a real effort to create something modern, sustainable, and community focused with it highlighted that more green planting areas and better-designed public space was needed in the area.  It was pointed out this reflected not only the need to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

Granted planning permission subject to:

(1)       The prior completion of a satisfactory Unilateral Undertaking under Section 106 of Town and Country Planning Act to secure the planning obligations as set out within the main committee report.

(2)       The conditions and informatives, as set out in the main and updated within the supplementary committee report.

PROPOSAL

Proposed rear dormer extension with Juliet balcony, new patio doors and ground floor kitchen door to rear, installation of 2x front roof lights, new front boundary treatment, conversion from dwellinghouse to a 7 bedroom 8 person house in multiple occupation (HMO), soft landscaping and installation of refuse storage and cycle storage to front garden.

RECOMMENDATION

That the Committee resolve to GRANT planning permission subject to:

(1)  The conditions and informatives as specified within the main committee report.

Curtis Thompson (Career Grade Planning Officer) introduced the planning application committee report, detailing that the proposal involved a rear door extension and the site was not within a conservation area.  In total 26 objections had been received.  Following the publication of the main Committee Report, another objection had been received by a neighbour and one from Councillor Choudry regarding a party wall agreement, although this would not form a relevant planning consideration.

The Chair thanked Curtis Thompson for introducing the report.  As there were no Committee questions raised at this point, the Chair then moved on to the consider the request which had been received to speak on the application.  Members were advised that whilst two objectors had registered to speak on of the representatives (Kathy Leonard) had advised they were unable to attend due to illness so had nominated the other person registered to speak in objection (TP) to make the representations on her behalf, which the Chair advised he had agreed.

On this basis, the Chair then invited a resident TP (who had registered to speak as an objector) to address the Committee, who highlighted the following points:

• TP explained that she was speaking on behalf of four adjacent households who shared 6 party walls and a household with a boundary to the garden of the application site highlighting the main objections as relating to noise, and nuisance (given the detrimental impact on the surrounding residents including children and vulnerable people) alongside the density of the proposal.

• Concern and objections were also raised in relation to what was felt to be an overconcentration of Houses in Multiple Occupation (HMOs) in the immediate surrounding area (for which it was felt the data provided in the report had been inaccurate) and need for family sized accommodation alongside the need to ensure (that if approved) a robust HMO Management Plan was provided to address concerns relating to the prevention and management of noise nuisance, anti-social behaviour and the management of waste disposal and storage facilities.

The Chair thanked TP for addressing the Committee and then moved on to offer the Committee the opportunity to ask any questions or points of clarity in relation to the application, with the following being noted:

• As an initial query, further clarification was sought on how many HMOs were in the area.  TP said that she had counted 14 and some were not showing as they were not licensed yet.

• Members asked TP to inform them of any issues she had with the conditions.  TP said that she  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

Granted planning permission subject to the planning conditions and informatives set out within the main committee report.

PROPOSAL

Proposed single-storey side-to-rear extension, basement extension with front and rear lightwells, and replacement of existing timber windows to front and rear elevations of dwellinghouse.

RECOMMENDATION

That the Committee resolve to GRANT planning permission subject to:

(1)  The conditions and informatives as specified within the main committee report.

Parag Dhanani (Career Grade Planning Officer) introduced the planning application for a two storey dwelling house located on the south side of Chevening Road and located within the Queens Park conservation area.  The proposal involved extensions to a side and rear extension, a basement extension with front and rear lightwells and the replacement of front and rear timber windows with the application having been submitted to the Committee for determination as the result of a request submitted by three local councillors.

The Chair thanked Parag Dhanani for introducing the report.  As there were no Committee questions raised at this point, the Chair then invited Alistair Newton (who had registered to speak as the agent) to address the Committee, who highlighted the following points:

• The application followed a planning consent (reference number 24/0414) granted in July 2024 for a proposed single story extension, side extension, basement extension with front and rear lightwells, demolition of shed, alterations to front, side and rear fenestrations and three roof lights to the rear outrigger of dwellinghouse.

• Further to the approved application, an application had been made for enlarged side infill extension to match that of the immediate neighbour (no.84) and to introduce a 2 metre single storey extension beyond the existing outrigger with a minor adjustment to the approved basement to accommodate for this extension.

• As the result of further adjustments, the proposed enlarged side/rear infill extension had since been omitted from the proposal resulting in a more limited scope beyond that of the previous planning consent granted in July 2024. 

• The proposal was limited to a 2 metre rear extension beyond the existing outrigger and a minor adjustment to the extent of the approved basement to accommodate for this enlarged ground floor single storey rear extension.

• The limited scope of the application was reflected in several constructed extensions in the local context, including addresses on Milman Road, Creighton Road and Chevening Road.  Many of these on Chevening Road were also ‘wrap around’ extensions where the rear positions met the side infill extensions. 

• The proposal did not differ from other approved and constructed extensions in local area and the application has been adjusted in negotiation with the Planning Officers to reduce the scale and the proposal and to remain in keeping with local guidance with the application.

The Chair thanked Alistair Newton for addressing the Committee.  Whilst no questions were raised in response confirmation was sought from the Planning Officers that the proposed development was felt to be in keeping with the surrounding area, which was confirmed by Parag Dhanani.

As there were no further questions or points of clarification raised by the Committee for response by the Planning Officers the Chair then moved straight to the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

Notice of items to be raised under this heading must be given in writing to the Deputy Director Democratic & Corporate Governance or their representative before the meeting in accordance with Standing Order 60.

There was no other urgent business.

There was no other urgent business.