Agenda item
21/0686 - 14 Canterbury Road, London, NW6 5ST
Minutes:
PROPOSAL:
Development authorised by the High Speed Rail (London-West Midlands) Act
2017 relating to the Canterbury Works Headhouse and Compound, consisting of: the vent shaft headhouse building comprising three principle connected headhouse elements (mechanical and electrical plant building, fan room and vent stacks); road vehicle parking within the compound with a hardstanding area; earthworks within the compound area for the headhouse building, including retaining walls and associated hardstanding area; an autotransformer station (location only); fencing (location only) encircling the headhouse building to create a secure compound; and artificial lighting equipment affixed to the headhouse building and within the compound.
RECOMMENDATION:
Resolve to grant planning permission subject to conditions as set out in the report.
That the Head of Planning is delegated authority to issue the planning permission and impose conditions as set out in the report.
That the Head of Planning is delegated authority to make changes to the wording of the committee’s decision (such as to delete, vary or add conditions, informatives, planning obligations or reasons for the decision) prior to the decision being actioned, provided that the Head of Planning is satisfied that any such changes could not reasonably be regarded as deviating from the overall principle of the decision reached by the committee nor that such change(s) could reasonably have led to a different decision having been reached by the Committee.
Paige Ireland, Principal Planning Officer, introduced the report, set out the key issues and answered members’ questions. The Principal Planning Officer advised that, as the proposal was not a planning application, members would need to consider whether the works ought to, or could reasonably be, modified. Members would need to consider: whether the proposal would preserve the local environment or local amenity; prevent or reduce prejudicial effects on road safety or on the free flow of traffic in local area; preserve a site of archaeological or historic interest or a nature conservation; and whether the development ought to, and could reasonably, be carried out elsewhere within the development’s permitted limits.
In reference to the supplementary report, the Principal Planning Officer drew members’ attention to the following points:
· A further objection had been received since the publication of the main report regarding the potential impacts on surrounding properties.
· The supplementary report addressed discrepancies in the main report regarding the 30-degree rule when considered in relation to Canterbury Terrace.
Lucy Neal, the agent, then addressed the Committee on several matters including:
· Operational personnel would visit the site infrequently to undertake scheduled maintenance. The site would also be a dedicated intervention point, allowing access down to the Euston Tunnels for the emergency services in the event of an incident occurring.
· During a normal night, only the site entrance would be lit to a dim 5 lux and there would be no light spill. Maintenance events were expected to be infrequent and, if undertaken at night time, would result in a 1-5 lux light spill. In the event of an intruder at night, there would be 1-5 lux light spill to adjacent buildings and in the event of an emergency there would illuminated t 20 lux and a 1-5 lux light spill to adjacent buildings.
· A daylight and sunlight assessment had been undertaken for Carlton and Canterbury House and found that the proposed development was compliant.
· HS2 and its contractors would design, construct, operate and maintain stationary systems to avoid significant adverse effects of noise and to minimise adverse effects of noise.
· Indicative plans had been provided to demonstrate how the building would be embedded into the landscape by providing soft landscape areas along the site boundaries, providing tree buffers between the HS2 site and its receptors as a visual mitigation and enhancing biodiversity.
· A robust dark grey engineering brick had been chosen as the predominant external material due to the inner London locality. The overall building sought to be a good neighbour by minimising its impact whilst remaining within HS2 functional requirements. This minimising of scale has been achieved by its “sculptural” design.
In response to questions from members, Lucy Neal made the following points:
· The timber clad main headhouse building would fade to a silver grey, blending in with the proposed landscaping. Green walls had been considered in place of timber but was not viable due to ventilation concerns.
· An indicative proposal had been put forward to provide learning opportunities for St Mary’s Catholic Primary School within the triangular area to the east of the site. This would likely take the form of a pocket park and was subject to further talks with the school.
· St Mary’s Catholic Primary School had been consulted throughout the development process. They had consulted on all aspects of building design and temporary works. There were upcoming meetings with the schools regarding the pocket park and road safety.
· Accesses into the site were acceptable in highways safety terms. St Mary’s Catholic Primary School had been consulted on these arrangements and had raised no objections so far.
In the ensuing discussion, members raised several issues including design, scale and appearance. Officers then clarified the following key point:
· The depth of the headhouse had been determined by the HS2 functional requirements for the fan room and the ventilation stacks were the minimum size in both area and height.
With no further issues raised and having established that all members had followed the discussions, the Chair thanked all speakers for their contributions and asked members to vote on the recommendation.
DECISION: Granted planning permission subject to conditions as set out in the report.
(Voting on the recommendation was as follows: For 7, Against 0)
Supporting documents:
- 21/0686 - 14 Canterbury Road, London, NW6 5ST, item 4. PDF 285 KB
- 4a. Agenda supplement, 21 0686 - 14 Canterbury Road, London, NW6 5ST, item 4. PDF 97 KB