Agenda item
21/3754 - 66 Cavendish Road, London, NW6 7XP
Decision:
Granted planning permission subject to:
(a) the prior completion of a legal agreement to secure the planning obligations set out within the report along with updates detailed within the supplementary agenda and following additional obligation agreed at the meeting:
· Inclusion of an additional financial contribution of £15,000 towards the improvements to local parks and open spaces.
(b) the conditions and informatives set out in the report and updates detailed within the supplementary agenda along with the inclusion of the following additional condition agreed at the meeting:
· To require that the communal spaces are for use by all residents within the development.
Minutes:
PROPOSAL
Demolition of the existing residential building and the construction of a new part five, part six storey residential building, together with associated landscaping, cycle parking and refuse and recycling facilities.
RECOMMENDATION:
(1) That the Committee resolve to GRANT planning permission subject to the prior completion of a legal agreement to secure the following planning obligations:
(a) Payment of the Council’s legal and other professional costs in (a) preparing and completing the agreement and (b) monitoring and enforcing its performance
(b) Notification of material start 28 days prior to commencement
(c) Financial contribution of £150,000 towards affordable housing provision in Brent.
(d) Late stage viability review (drafted in line with standard GLA review clause wording) to be submitted at or after 75% occupation of the private residential development. An offsite affordable housing payment to be made where an uplift in profit above a break-even position is identified. Viability review to be based on an agreed Benchmark Land Value of £3.368m and developer profit of 17.5%. Not more than 90% of the private dwellings to be occupied until viability review approved in writing by the LPA.
(e) Sustainability and energy
(i) Detailed design stage energy assessment. Initial carbon offset payment if zero-carbon target not achieved on site.
(ii) Post-construction energy assessment. Final carbon offset payment if zero-carbon target not achieved on site.
(iii) ‘Be seen’ energy monitoring requirements
(2) That the Head of Planning is delegated authority to negotiate the legal agreement indicated above.
(3) That the Head of Planning is delegated authority to issue the planning permission and impose conditions and informatives as set out in the report.
(4) 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
(5) That the Committee confirms that adequate provision has been made, by the imposition of conditions, for the preservation or planting of trees as required by Section 197 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990
June Taylor, Principal Planning Officer, South Team, introduced the report and set out the key issues. In introducing the report members were advised that the application was seeking the demolition of the existing residential building comprising of 13 studio flats and the construction of a new part five, part six storey residential building comprising of 21 flats (4 x 1-bedroom, 12 x 2-bedroom and 5 x 3-bedroom), together with associated landscaping, cycle parking and refuse and recycling facilities. The committee were informed that the subject site was a three-storey detached building that occupied the corner plot at the south-eastern junction of Willesden Lane and Cavendish Road. The building was currently in residential use as 13 self-contained studio flats. The site fell within an Intensification Corridor designated within the Brent Local Plan and was not located in a conservation area. Although the site had been proposed to form part of a conservation area in Brent's Local Plan it was noted that this designation would be subject to a further legal process and was not currently in effect.
In closing the introduction to the application the Planning Officer drew members attention to the supplementary report that included details of an amendment to the proposed s106 Heads of Terms, an increase in the development’s Urban Greening Factor and some minor amendments to pre-existing conditions including a change in the wording on Condition 16 that provided more clarity on the level and type of detail of the material used for the external works of the proposed development.
Members noted the information provided and as no questions were raised at this point the Chair then invited Mr David Callister (objector) to address the Committee (in person) in relation to the application.
Mr Callister introduced himself as a local resident who lived in the neighbouring property to the proposed application, he then went on to share his concerns regarding the application as follows:
· The proximity of the proposed development to his garden and view that its design and scale would be excessive and lead to unacceptable overshadowing of his garden and property.
· Many properties in the area were of Victorian and Georgian design, Mr Callister felt that the proposed new development would not be in keeping with the Victorian and Georgian design features and therefore would alter the character of the area.
· The relationship between the proposed development and neighbouring development currently under construction at No.162 Willesden Lane which, whilst having paused had been a focus of fly-tipping to the area as well as noise pollution and disruption to local roads.
· In light of the observations made with regard to No.162 Willesden Lane there was further concern that if the proposed application were to be approved the impact of having two adjacent buildings being demolished and reconstructed at the same time would have negative consequences for the local community as a result of increased construction traffic and noise pollution.
· In summarising his concerns Mr Callister urged the Committee that in making their decision consideration should be given to the wider detrimental impacts on local residents, their wellbeing and the surrounding infrastructure, in addition to the loss of green space and how this would affect local wildlife, if the proposal was approved.
The Chair thanked Mr Callister for his contribution and in doing so the Committee extended their thanks and acknowledgment of the difficulties in presenting an objection to the Committee, particularly when the subject was so emotive for local residents. As there were no questions for Mr Callister the Chair invited Belinda Sinclair (objector) to address the Committee (in person) in relation to the application.
Ms Sinclair introduced herself as the Chair of the Historic Brondesbury Park Building Group before moving on to share the Group’s following concerns in relation to the proposed development:
· The timing of the application, in advance of consideration being given to the possible inclusion of Cavendish Road within a Conservation Area, given the additional protections this would provide in terms of preserving the character of the area.
· The character and features of the buildings in the area and the importance of retaining their character, noting that if planning permission was granted the character of the area would be affected.
· Concerns were also raised regarding the loss of green space and the additional pressures that the development would have on local amenities such as doctors and school places in the area.
· Further concerns were raised regarding the perceived lack of a safe pedestrian crossing on the road, which there had been local lobbying to improve. The group felt that there would be an increased risk of harm with added construction traffic to the area.
· The group queried the lack of public consultation, stating that despite a number of members of the Historic Brondesbury Park Building Group living in close proximity to the proposed development it appeared none of them had received consultation material.
· In summarising the group’s concerns, Ms Sinclair requested that the Committee were mindful of the concerns raised by local residents in relation to light, overshadowing and overall impact on the neighbourhood before they made their decision on the application.
In response to questions from the Committee in relation to her comments Ms Sinclair responded with the following points:
· In response to a question regarding whether the objectors felt reassured, in terms of traffic and road safety impact, by the proposed development being designed to be car free, Ms Sinclair replied that this did not provide reassurance. This was in view of the impact which both this and the adjacent development and construction works would have in terms of generating additional construction traffic, which she felt posed a serious health and safety concern for the local community.
· Ms Sinclair advised the Committee that the group were broadly supportive of new affordable homes in the area and understood the housing need in Brent, however it was felt the proposed development was not seeking to provide affordable homes for local residents and was in fact a luxury development.
As there were no further questions raised the Chair invited the final speaker Lewis Westhoff (as the applicant’s agent) to address the Committee (in person). Lewis Westhoff introduced the application, drawing the Committee’s attention to the following key points:
· The scheme aimed to deliver a new purpose-built residential development in a sustainable location that would provide much needed new housing for the borough that included the provision of a range of housing sizes, including 1, 2 and 3 bedroom homes suitable for a range of households, including families.
· The affordable housing contribution of £150,000 would help contribute to the delivery of affordable housing within the London Borough of Brent.
· The delivery of a high-quality architectural building that responded to the site’s context as a corner site, the recently approved development at 162 Willesden Lane and the prevailing character of the local area.
· The scheme would provide extensive areas of private and communal amenity space for occupants of the development.
· The scheme achieved a high Urban Greening Factor, enhanced by the removal of low quality trees and the replacement with new, native tree species along the frontage of the site. In addition to this the removal of redundant vehicle crossovers and the provision of new high quality streetscape planting would benefit the local townscape and streetscape.
· The scheme would deliver a sustainable and energy efficient building that utilised energy efficient building fabric, green roofs and PV panels.
· The delivery of a car free development with high levels of cycle parking to support sustainable transport to and from the site.
· The design of the development would be in keeping with the development of 162 Willesden Lane and both developments had been designed to complement each other.
· The proposed scheme was an exemplar way to optimise the corner site that sat within the intensification corridor, corresponding with Brent’s Local Plan.
In response to Committee questions Mr Westhoff clarified the following points:
· Measures to prevent overlooking had been considered and factored in to the design of the building, this included the addition of inset windows that were angled to the south that would allow outlook for residents of the proposed scheme whilst also protecting the outlook of neighbouring properties.
· Mr Westhoff confirmed that the applicant would be happy to agree a reasonable contribution towards the improvement of local community park and open space amenities given that the added amenity space included in the proposed developments was for use of residents of the new development.
· In response to Committee concerns that there were no affordable housing units available as part of the scheme, Mr Westhoff informed the Committee that the applicant recognised the importance of affordable housing as part of the scheme coupled with the need to optimise the site space as much as possible. Following an independent viability assessment, however, it had been confirmed that the scheme could not include the commercially viable delivery of on-site affordable housing. In recognition of this the applicant had offered a s106 contribution of £150,000 to support affordable housing provision within Brent.
· Following a Committee comment regarding the risk of flooding with particular reference to the basement properties, Mr Westhoff advised the Committee that rain water run off on the site achieved a reduction against the current site through the use of a sustainable urban drainage solution, permeable paving and an on-site attenuation storage of 25 cubic metres. This would mitigate the risk of excessive run off water with the stored water being discharged at a controlled rate.
· A Construction Management Plan would ensure that Health and Safety concerns resulting from the possibility of any parallel construction works taking place were considered and disruption to the community would be minimised as much as possible. This would need to be secured by condition before any works could start on the proposed development on Cavendish Road.
· Mr Westhoff confirmed that the development would comply with condition 4 that would ensure that machinery used would be compliant with the recommended ranges of noise and emissions in order to mitigate noise and air pollution concerns.
After considering the responses provided by Mr Westhoff, the Chair invited Committee members to ask officers any further questions or points of clarification they may have. Committee members had a number of queries that included issues regarding the location on the site, amenity space, the height of the proposed development, flooding and drainage and local transport links. The following responses were provided by officers:
· Officers confirmed that the proposed scheme fell within an Intensification Corridor designated within the Local Plan, with clarification provided around the definition and purpose of these designations within Brent’s Local Plan. In terms of the design, scale and appearance the Committee were advised that within the Local Plan the locations policy BD2 suggested that developments with a height of up to 15 m above ground level may be acceptable while policy BH4 set out that the character of the existing area would be subject to change over the plan period. On the basis of the reasons set out in the report the design and scale of the development was therefore considered to be acceptable in the context of the existing and emerging street scene in the area, bulk and massing with no material impact on nearby heritage assets and was therefore identified as a suitable location for development.
· Whilst noting the shortfall in private and communal external amenity space against Brent’s policy targets the Committee were advised that on balance this had been considered to be acceptable given the proximity to Queens Park and Aylestone Avenue Open Space and other local parks within the radius of an 8-10 minute walk. It was also noted that the applicants agent had confirmed (during the meeting) given the concerns identified that the applicant would be willing to include an additional financial contribution of £15,000 towards the improvements of local parks and open spaces.
· In response to a Committee query requesting some further details around the maximum height of the proposed building in line with Policy BD2, officers informed the Committee that the proposed building would range in height from three to five storeys, with additional accommodation at lower ground floor level. Most of the building would be less than 15m in height however ground level changes within the site and elements of the 4th floor projected marginally above this by approximately 0.5 metres. Areas where the policy height were exceeded were the lift overrun and the enclosure for the roof terrace. These had however been considered acceptable in the context of the existing and emerging street scene in the area. Officers advised that the corner location provided scope for a five storey element that acted as a marker block and responded to the development coming forward from the opposite site.
· Officers confirmed that the Council’s Tree Officer had no objections to the scheme on arboricultural grounds and that the two trees subject to Tree Preservation Orders would be retained with the ecological appraisal having identified that the development would be unlikely to affect the ecological value of the area.
· In response to Committee concerns that the area could become overdeveloped in the future, officers reassured the Committee that any new development proposals would be subject to detailed assessment in terms of compliance with national and local planning policy which would include impact on neighbouring properties, the existing character of the area, design and scale as well as mix of tenure and environmental considerations and would need to demonstrate how these requirements were met prior to consideration.
· In answer to a Committee query regarding the impact of the proposed development on flooding and drainage in the area, officers advised that the Local Lead Flood Authority had been consulted and noted that despite the proposal leading to a 48% increase in non- permeable space within the site, the proposed implementation of sustainable drainage measures via 25 cubic metres of storage attenuation would significantly reduce the controlled discharge rates, with an 86% reduction in a 1 in 100 year event. Consequently the development provided a significant betterment from a flood risk perspective.
· Officers advised that due to the area around the site having been identified as previously contaminated, a full assessment of land contamination would be required. This would be secured by condition, together with the implementation and validation of any necessary remediation measures.
· Officers informed the Committee that if the scheme were approved, it would not be possible to give a time frame as to when construction would start as there were a number factors that would impact on this including the outcome of the land contamination and other assessments and pre construction conditions needing to be met. Therefore it was possible that concerns regarding the construction of two adjacent developments in tandem would be alleviated, given that work was already underway at 162 Willesden Lane.
· A Construction Plan would need to be submitted ahead of construction, this would address how any disruption in the event of work being completed on both sites would be mitigated to minimise disruption.
· Following a Committee comment recognising that the proposed scheme’s communal space should be for the use of all residents not just those in the ground floor units, it was agreed that a further condition be added to clarify that communal space was for use by all residents within the new development.
· Whilst noting the proposed development would be car free with no parking provided on site and on street permit parking restrictions members were advised this had been considered to be acceptable given the good accessibility of public transport in the area. Officers advised that the proposed development had been given a Public Transport Accessibility Level (PTAL) rating of 4, which was considered a high rating given that PTAL ratings were from 1- 6. The closest over ground station to the site was Brondesbury Park, with Kilburn being the closest tube station. There were also a number of local bus routes in close proximity. The Committee were also advised that in line with London Plan Policy T5 a store room at lower ground floor level would provide 40 secure cycle parking spaces.
As there were no further issues raised and having established that all members had followed the discussions the Chair asked members to vote on the recommendation that included the additional conditions as set out below.
DECISION: Granted planning permission subject to:
(a) the prior completion of a legal agreement to secure the planning obligations set out within the report along with updates detailed within the supplementary agenda and following additional obligation agreed at the meeting:
· Inclusion of an additional financial contribution of £15,000 towards the improvements of local parks and open spaces.
(b) the conditions and informatives set out in the report and updates detailed within the supplementary agenda along with the inclusion of the following additional condition agreed at the meeting:
· To require that the communal spaces are for use by all residents within the development.
(Voting on the recommendations was as follows: For: 7, Against 0 and Abstain 0)
Supporting documents:
- 04. 21.3754 Cavendish Road, item 4. PDF 346 KB
- 04. Supplementary Report 21.3754 Cavendish Road, item 4. PDF 102 KB