Agenda item
31 Montrose Avenue, London, NW6 6LE (Ref. 15/4484)
- Meeting of Planning Committee, Wednesday 16 December 2015 7.00 pm (Item 9.)
- View the declarations of interest for item 9.
Decision:
Granted planning permission as recommended subject to two additional conditions requiring (1) a Construction Management Statement; and (2) a soil survey by a suitably qualified person.
Minutes:
PROPOSAL:
Proposed excavation of basement, installation of front lightwell, internal glass panels toform rear lightwells, insertion of three rear roof lights to existing single storey addition, replacement and enlargement of first floor rear facing window and alteration to first floor side facing window to dwelling house
RECOMMENDATION: Grant planning permission subject to conditions as set out in the draft decision notice.
Angus Saunders (Area Planning Manager) introduced the report and with reference to the tabled supplementary report responded to queries raised. He informed members that due to the category (U grade) of the cherry tree in the pavement to the front of the site, it was considered appropriate for removal in the future. However, in the interim, a new condition was proposed to require protection during construction. He continued that in the interests of residential amenity, the applicant had submitted a Construction Method Statement which set out measures to address noise and manage dust during construction. He referenced the building collapses in Barnet and Barnes and explained that those incidents arose from poor construction method. In response to concerns about soil conditions, the Area Planning Manager stated that a detailed method statement showed how the soil would be investigated.
Janis Denselow (an objector) reiterated that residents were not convinced by the applicant’s Construction Method Statement and added that their concerns including the protection of the tree and the claim about a possible unexploded bomb in the area had not been addressed. She requested a deferral of the application to enable residents to study how other local authorities approached similar applications.
In accordance with the provisions of the Planning Code of Practice, Councillor Nerva, ward member, stated that he had been approached by residents and had met with the applicant and the objectors. Councillor Nerva stated that there were serious concerns about the impact of basement developments in the area which was characterised by Edwardian houses with minimal and shallow foundations within the London clay belt area. It would therefore be necessary for all basement developments to be subject to geological surveys and for that reason he requested a moratorium whilst Brent developed a comprehensive basement policy.
Jennifer Taylor (applicant) and Ben Bates (applicant’s architect) were in attendance. Jennifer Taylor informed members that the application met Brent’s guidelines on basement developments and was in line with precedents. She added that residents’ concerns would be addressed by the Construction Method Statement and a requirement to sign up to the Considerate Construction Scheme. Ben Bates added that although a geological survey had not yet been carried out for the proposal, the contractor would use a method of underpinning to ensure the stability of the foundations of nearby properties.
The chair queried whether the applicant could be required to comply with a condition to produce a geological soil survey which also commented on the potential impact of multiple basements developments on other properties. The chair also requested a formal review of Brent's existing basement policy and encouraged the Queens Park ward councillors to initiate the process by attending a meeting with the Planning team.
Stephen Weeks (Head of Planning) clarified that Brent had an existing practice guide towards basement developments which had been developed with the Planning Committee and enabled applicants to think through their projects and possible construction methodologies, and had generally resulted in acceptable proposals. There was also recent amended design guidance for the Conservation Area which recognised basement development. In the circumstances, he did not endorse the request for a moratorium, and this view was endorsed by Patricia Bramwell, the legal representative. However, he referred to forthcoming discussions with Ward Councillors around basement issues.
In endorsing the recommendation for approval, members were minded to add a further condition for a Construction Method Statement and a soil survey.
DECISION: Granted planning permission as recommended subject to two additional conditions requiring (1) a Construction Method; and (2) a soil survey by a suitably qualified person.
Supporting documents: