Agenda item

Deferred to next meeting as minded to grant planning permission. Agreed statement on impact on MOL and noted suggested conditions relating to clearing up of the grounds and offering boating training for local schools.

PROPOSAL:

Refurbishment of existing boat station to include new gravelled work area at the rear and installation of new spiral staircase to the front, removal of 3 portacabins and erection of a 2 storey extension with a monopitch roof

RECOMMENDATION: Refuse planning permission.

With reference to the tabled supplementary report, Rachel McConnell, Area Planning Manager clarified the relationship of the proposal to the neighbouring buildings to the north and the height of the proposal compared to BTYC building to the south. Members heard that the depth of the neighbouring building was similar to the existing Sea Cadets Corp building and that the bulk of the BTYC building, being predominantly single storey, was significantly less. Rachel McConnell then referred to additional letters of support and the applicant’s submission of “Visual Assessment” which sought to challenge officers’ view about the harm to the openness of the Metropolitan Open Land (MOL) and added that the ubmission did not change the recommendation for refusal

Giles Rowing, a Sea Cadet speaking in support of the proposed development stated that the Welsh Harp had the only sailing base in the area however, the current facilities required modernisation before the present portakabins became unusable.  He continued that the extra classrooms spaces that would be provided would be most helpful for training and that the proposal would fit in well with the current surrounding area without causing harm to the environment. 

In accordance with the provisions of the Planning Code of Practice, Councillor Cheese who also called in the application to Committee stated that he had been approached by Councillor Hopkins about the application. Councillor Cheese informed members that the Sea Cadet buildings which had been in existence since 1959 did not offer modern facilities for the cadets.  He added that the provision of extra classroom spaces would address current problems associated with the old buildings without leading to intensification.  Councillor Cheese continued that in his view the proposal would not be out of keeping with the surrounding buildings and urged members to be minded to grant planning permission.

Mr Martin Cole, the applicant  submitted that the application would replace outdated buildings, provide accommodation and much needed training to the cadets within the current footprint.  He referred to the visual assessment statement which he added showed comprehensively that the proposal could be considered acceptable on the basis that the extension would not be harmful to the openness of the Metropolitan Open Land (MOL). Martin Cole continued that the proposal which would be in keeping with surrounding buildings would enable boating training sessions to be offered to local schools.

In response to members’ enquiries, Martin Cole stated that if members were minded to grant planning permission he would agree to additional conditions requiring boating training sessions to local schools and he would ensure that the grounds to the rear of the building were cleared.  He continued that the height of the proposed building which would be significantly lower than the University of London  buildings would enable the Sea Cadet Corp to replace current old buildings with a modern equivalent which was vital  to boating training in good structured facilities.  Members heard from Martin Cole that if the building was not replaced it was likely that the facility would be closed down this winter

Rachel McConnell in response to a Member’s request to clarify matters relating to the building line stated that the applicant’s further submission was received too late to allow officers adequate time for its assessment against measurements taken from the submitted plans and OS plans. She advised that the measurements were different to those set out in the supplementary report however given that Members had viewed the site they had a clear understanding of the relationship with the neighbouring buildings. Stephen Weeks, Head of Area Planning, added that was scope for the applicant to reduce the rear 2-storey part of the proposal as it was considered that the this element rasied most concern in of the MOL.

In the discussion that followed, Members confirmed they were minded to grant planning permission contrary to officers’ recommendation for refusal and deferred the application to the next meeting as they considered that the level of harm as a result of the extension would not be so significant as to unacceptably effect the openness of the MOL and that any impact would be outweighed by the benefits of the scheme.  Members advised that any approval should be subject to the  applicant providing boat training to local schools and clearance of rubbish from the area of land to the side and rear of the existing building.

DECISION: Deferred to next meeting as minded to grant planning permission. Agreed statement on impact on MOL and noted suggested conditions relating to clearing up of the grounds and offering boat training for local schools..

Voting on the substantive recommendation for refusal which was declared lost was recorded as follows:

FOR:                 None.                                                                                   (0)

AGAINST:      Councillors John, Aden, Brown, Cummins, Hashmi,

                          Kabir, Kataria, Powney and Singh                                 (9)

ABSTENTION: Councillor Sheth                                                              (1)