Agenda item
Lycee International De Londres, 54 Forty Lane, Wembley, HA9 9LY (Ref. 15/4140)
Decision:
Refused planning permission for the first reason relating to the design, size, siting and location of the building and associated impact on the setting and views to the Listed Building.
Minutes:
PROPOSAL:
Erection of a part basement building fronting Forty Lane to house a five lane swimming pool and studio with a green roof and associated works to include courtyard entrance, security gates, cycle parking, demolition and reinstatement of retaining wall, landscaping and installation of PV panels on the roof of the new Annex building
RECOMMENDATION: Grant planning permission subject to conditions as set out in the Draft Decision Notice with an additional condition requiring the facility to be ancillary to the school (with the exception of community access), Or, if the Planning Committee is still minded to refuse, to consider the two possible reasons set out on page 12 of the agenda report.
David Glover (Area Planning Manager) introduced the report. He drew members’ attention to the two main reasons for refusal of the application (as set out in the Committee report) and added that since the last meeting Transport for London (TfL) had provided additional information which addressed one of the reasons for refusing the application. With reference to the supplementary report he clarified that as the swimming pool was considered to be ancillaryto the schooluse and would fallwithin use classD1,it wouldincura zero charge for Brent Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) and exemption from Mayoral CIL. The Area Planning Manager added that the swimming pool would be available for use bythe communityas partof the communityaccessarrangements for the schooland be chargeable to the communityat rates comparable to similar localauthorityfacilities.
Robert Dunwell speaking on behalf of Queensbury Area Residents’ Association (QARA Group of Associations in support of the application stated that the proposed swimming pool would not adversely impact on the visibility of the listed building.
Andrew Murdoch and Neil Goldsmith (applicants’ agents) addressed the Committee and answered members queries. Members heard that additional information received from TfL confirmed that the bus shelter may not be required to be moved and that if the bus cage was moved by up to 4m, there would be adequate space for six cars to be able to stand in front of the bus cage when waiting at the traffic lights. They added that as the site sloped, the obstruction to the views of the listed building would be limited except when immediately in front of the proposed building. The Council’s Transportation Unit reconfirmed their advice that the proposal would be acceptable in principal and the Supplementary indicated that the proposed relocation or removal of the public telephone (BT) kiosk would not raise any significant planning or listed building issues.
In the ensuing discussions, members expressed a view that their concerns about the siting of the re-located bus stop and bus cage and the potential impact on pedestrian and highway safety had been addressed by the additional information provided by TfL. However, as their concerns regarding design, size, siting and impact on the Listed Building had not been addressed, members were still minded to refuse the application although they were supportive of the proposal for a swimming pool that could be used by the public. The applicants were encouraged to work with Planning Services to address the concerns raised.
Voting on the recommendation for refusal was recorded as follows:
FOR: Councillors Marquis, Colacicco, Choudhary and Maurice (4)
AGAINST: Councillors Agha, Ezeajughi and Mahmood (3)
ABSTENSION: Councillor Mili Patel (1)
DECISION: Refused planning permission for the first reason relating to the design, size, siting and location of the building and associated impact on the setting and views to the Listed Building.
Supporting documents:
- 3 Lycee International, 54 Forty Lane Wembley, item 3. PDF 907 KB
- 3 Lycee International, item 3. PDF 56 KB