Agenda item

Grant planning permission subject to the completion of a satisfactory Section 106 or other legal agreement and delegate authority to the Head of Area Planning, or other duly authorised person, to agree the exact terms thereof on advice from the Director of Legal and Procurement.  If the applicant fails to demonstrate the ability to provide for the s106 terms and meet the policies of the Unitary Development Plan, Core Strategy and Section 106 Planning Obligations Supplementary Planning Document by concluding an agreement within an appropriate timescale, to delegate authority to the Head of Area Planning, or other duly authorised person, to refuse planning permission.

PROPOSAL: 

Demolition of a block of ten garages and the erection of a three storey building comprising 5 flats (1 x 1-bed, 2 x 2-bed and 2 x 3-bed) including new landscaping, refuse and recycling storage, cycle storage and the provision of 5 off-street car parking spaces.

RECOMMENDATION: Grant planning permission subject to the completion of a satisfactory Section 106 or other legal agreement and delegate authority to the Head of Area Planning, or other duly authorised person, to agree the exact terms thereof on advice from the Director of Legal and Procurement.  If the applicant fails to demonstrate the ability to provide for the s106 terms and meet the policies of the Unitary Development Plan, Core Strategy and Section 106 Planning Obligations Supplementary Planning Document by concluding an agreement within an appropriate timescale, to delegate authority to the Head of Area Planning, or other duly authorised person, to refuse planning permission.

Neil McClellan, Area Planning Manager stated that as a result of some of the issues raised at the site visit the applicant has agreed an additional payment of £5,000 as part of the Section 106 legal agreement to address the issue of fly tipping into river Brent. He then informed members about amendments to conditions 6 and 7 and the deletion of condition 15.

In accordance with the Planning Code of Practice, Councillor Daniel Brown, ward member, stated that he had been approached by some of the local residents. Councillor Brown informed members that the garages existed to alleviate the heavy parking in the area adding that the five off street parking spaces provided for the development would not be adequate to address the parking situation.  He also drew members’ attention to the list of objections set out in the consultation section of the main report. 

Mr Martin Evans, the applicant’s agent stated that the provision of five parking spaces had been arrived at as a result extensive discussions with transportation officers who considered the provision acceptable.  He continued that the applicant had given a 1metre strip of land to the Council to alleviate parking issues as well as to prevent possible obstruction to emergency services vehicles.  Mr Evans added that the demolition of the garages and their replacement with sustainable residential buildings would prevent fly tipping and other undesirable activities on the site.

In response to the Chair’s enquiry on outlook, Mr Evans submitted that as a triangular shaped site, it would be difficult to provide a pitched roof and in his view, flat roof was the best way forward.  He added that amenity space and parking provisions complied with the Council’s standards and UDP policies.

Councillor Daly asked officers to clarify whether there would be loss of on-street parking as a result of the development.  Neil McClellan responded that the 5 parking spaces proposed was considered acceptable based on UDP parking standards.  He reiterated that the extra one metre provided by the applicant would ease on-street parking and vehicle movements and added that highways officers were satisfied with the arrangements.  Neil McClellan added that the proposal offered amenity spaces in excess of acceptable minimum standards.

DECISION: Planning permission granted as recommended subject to the deletion of condition 16 and amendments to conditions 6 and 7.