Agenda item

Granted planning permission subject to the conditions as set out in the Committee and Supplementary report and prior completion of a legal agreement to secure the planning obligations set out in the Committee report.

PROPOSAL

The proposal involves the conversion of the existing dwellinghouse into five self-contained flats.  The development would involve external alterations which include the erection of a rear dormer window and 1.no side rooflight, replacement front windows, and the relocation of the front entrance door along the principal elevation of the building.  The rear garden area would also be subdivided, and the proposal will include the provision of off-road parking, cycle and waste storage and associated hard and soft landscaping.

RECOMMENDATION

(1)        That the Committee resolve to GRANT planning permission subject to:

(a)        The completion of a legal agreement to secure the planning obligations detailed within the report.

(b)        the conditions and informatives as set out in the Committee report and supplementary report.

(1)          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.

(2)            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.

Curtis Thompson (Planning Officer) introduced the report which the Committee was advised involved the conversion of the existing dwellinghouse into 5 x self-contained flats. The development would involve external alterations which included the erection of a rear dormer window and 1 side rooflight, replacement front windows, and the relocation of the front entrance door along the principal elevation of the building. The rear garden area would also be subdivided, and the proposal will include the provision of off-road parking, cycle and waste storage and associated hard and soft landscaping.  Members attention was also drawn to the supplementary report which included reference to an updated plan and a resulting amendment to Condition 2 with the recommendation remaining to grant consent subject to the completion of the necessary s106 agreement and conditions.

The Chair thanked Curtis Thompson for introducing the report, and then invited Lalji Vekaria, speaking in support of the application as the architect, to address the Committee.  The following key points were highlighted:

·             The Committee were advised that the application had been submitted by a long standing charity operating in Brent the Shri Swaminarayan Temple based in Neasden who, whilst recognising the s106 planning contribution as as policy requirement, also felt that discretion should be available as to how this requirement was applied in relation to charitable organisations.

·             This was a revised application following the refusal of a previous application and dismissed appeal.  The current proposal addressed the issue of the ceiling height in one of the proposed flats which had now reverted to a one person unit and also included a dormer window to provide better outlook.  All the other flats exceeded the minimum requirements and were sufficiently large in floor area to include required storage space.

·             Officers were commended for their hard work and engagement in bringing the application forward which it was pointed out now met in principle all national framework policies as well as complying with the application of local framework and policies and the Committee urged to support the application with or without a s106 contribution.

The Chair thanked Lalji Vekaria, for addressing the Committee and then invited questions and comments from members in relation to the information heard.  The following key points were highlighted:

·             Further details were sought on whether this application took into account all relevant standards in relation to the design and quality of the accommodation with it confirmed that all of the proposed units meet the relevant standards for internal and external space and quality.  While the proposed units would meet or exceed the minimum GIA standards, it is noted that only unit 5 would meet the minimum requirements for built-in storage. However, in these instances, officers consider that as the shortfall of built-in storage space was compensated by the overall GIA floorspace provided, the shortfall of built-in storage space could reasonably be addressed within each unit. Given the surplus in overall floorspace and general good quality of accommodation, the shortfall was considered to be acceptable.  The proposed design standards would also Policy D6 within the London Plan.

·             Details were sought on the ability to waive Section 106 for charitable organisations.  The Committee noted that whilst the requirement for these contributions would need to be applied to all qualifying developments it was possible to apply for certain exemptions including those related to charitable purposes in relation to Community Infrastructure Levy.  In terms of the level of contribution required Policy BH5 of the Local Plan set out the need for developments of between 5-9 units to make a financial contribution for the provision of affordable housing off-site. The financial contribution was £100,000 per dwelling as set out within Brent’s S106 Planning Obligation SPD. with any reduction in the financial contribution needed to be justified by a Financial Viability Assessment (FVA) that demonstrated that the scheme was securing the maximum reasonable payment in lieu of on-site delivery.  Having been subject to the necessary assessment it was considered that that the scheme would be required to deliver a contribution of £83,000 as the maximum viable amount of contributionfor off-site affordable housing provision.

·             Regarding transport considerations, clarification was sought on the layout of the car park spaces and whether any alternatives had been considered due to the two spaces in tandem on the driveway.  Whilst recognised as an unusual layout the provision would continue to comply with relevant standards.

·             Regarding the borough losing a family home and gaining 3 flats instead, the Committee noted that Policy BH11 was applied here to ensure the properties designed had at least 3 bedrooms in them.

·             Whilst recognising that the application would result in the conversion of the existing 3 bedroom dwellinghouse into 5 new self-contained flats the proposals was policy compliant with the proposal comprising a mix of dwelling types including a family unit (3-bedroom) at ground-floor with private amenity access. All proposed units meet the relevant standards for internal and external space and quality and would contribute to Brents housing delivery targets, as well as other modest external alterations. The site was also located within a priority area for housing and thus residential intensification in this location was considered acceptable in principle.

·             Whilst noting the proposal did not clearly set out whether the scheme would achieve an Urban Greening Factor (UGF) in line with policy BH4 the benefits of the scheme including an improvement the UGF and the delivery of a family sized home were considered to outweigh any limited harm in conflict with this policy.

·             Clarification was sought on whether the Council had nominations rights to the properties.  The Committee noted that the Council would not, as these would be considered private properties.

As there were no further questions from members the Chair then moved on to the vote.

DECISION

RESOLVED to grant planning permission subject to the conditions as set out in the Committee and Supplementary report and prior completion of a legal agreement to secure the planning obligations set out in the Committee report.

(Voting on the above decision was as follows: Unanimous in favour)