Agenda item
Allotments R/O 1-31 odd, Wembley Hill Tennis Club Grounds, Sports and Social Club, Vivian Avenue, Wembley, HA9 (Ref. 12/2653)
Decision:
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 Services and Procurement.
Minutes:
PROPOSAL:
Redevelopment of site including the demolition of the former Wembley Hill
Sports and Social Club building and the erection of 40 residential extra care units in two blocks (1 x two storey and 1 x three storey block), the provision of a new community open space, landscaping, and car parking with vehicle access gained via Corsham House (as amended by revised plans).
RECOMMENDATION:
Grant planning permission subject to additional conditions on vehicle access barrier and visibility as in the supplementary, the completion of a satisfactory Section 106 or other legal agreement with amended Heads of Terms and as set out in the supplementary 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 Services and Procurement.
Steve Weeks, Head of Area Planning, in reference to the tabled supplementary report, informed members that Transportation officers had confirmed they were satisfied that adequate visibility would be achieved in either direction for vehicles crossing the footpath. Furthermore, measures proposed to be undertaken as part of the Section 278 agreement would reduce vehicle speed and by emphasising the presence of the footpath would give priority to pedestrians. He added that whilst the installation of a gate or barrier on the Corsham House (east side of the footpath) was welcomed in principle, further details would be secured through condition to ensure that it was appropriately sited.
In response to queries raised at the site visit, the Head of Area Planning clarified that resurfacing of the public footpath should apply to the length of the footpath adjoining the site as part of the section 278 works. He added that the grass verges along Victoria Court did not form part of the application as it was outside of the application site. In order to ensure the applicant agreed the condition of the highway before commencement of works, he recommended an amendment to condition 19 for submission of a Construction Method Statement.
Members heard that a sustainability checklist with a self-assessed score of 50.3% had been submitted but that it had been re-assessed by officers to have a slightly lower score of 48.3%. The development had also been designed to include a Combined Heat and Power Unit (CHP). On site renewable technology had been considered and photovoltaic (PV) systems which were in line with London Plan policy 5.7 were proposed.
He added that the Landscape Officer considered the measures proposed to compensate for the loss of vegetation, habitats and nature conservation value to be relatively good however, the Section 106 financial contribution had been amended slightly to secure £63,000 to compensate for the losses. Furthermore, an additional clause was proposed requiring the applicants, prior to a material start, to submit and have approved an Allotment Management Strategy. He drew members’ attention to the revised landscaping strategy submitted which confirmed that additional trees would be planted with new trees proposed along the northern edge of the site to help provide screening of the buildings for adjoining gardens.
Mrs Bridie Ahmed a local resident expressed her support for the proposed development particularly as it would provide care units. She however sought the Committee’s clarification and assurance on condition 19 as set out in the main report.
Mr Mark Connell, the applicant’s agent expressed gratitude for the residents’ support and confirmed the applicant’s intention to work with in partnership with the residents. He drew attention to the financial contribution under the Section 106 agreement and added that the applicant would not propose alternative uses for the site, confirming that the site would remain for allotment uses only.
During question time, Mr Connell was asked to indicate the extent of help that Willow Housing was prepared to give to allotment holders and whether community elements would be preserved. The agent confirmed that the applicant would develop and manage the site according to guidelines as well as organise meetings with the community.
During discussion, Councillor Cummins expressed concerns about the proposal in that the allotments would be tenanted by Willow Housing to the community via a legal agreement with a local residents group (yet to be set up) who would act as landlord for the allotment, manage the space and pay an annual rent in line with Brent’s allotment charges. He also noted with some concern a break clause that would allow Willow to terminate the lease and implement another acceptable use and urged for a degree of flexibility to be applied. The Chair remarked that the rent to be charged should be affordable to the allotment holders.
Councillor Cummins observed that the path was in a poor state of repair to be resurfaced and put forward an amendment for a condition requiring the applicant to resurface the entire pathway so as to make it safe for the elderly. Prior to voting, the Head of Area Planning advised that the amendment, which had cost implications, had not been previously put to the applicant. The amendment was however put to the vote and declared carried.
DECISION: Agreed as recommended with additional conditions, revised condition 19 to agree condition of highway and revised Heads of Terms requiring the applicant to prepare the allotment site and to carrying out repairs to the whole of the pathway.
Supporting documents: