Agenda, decisions and minutes

Apologies were received from Councillor Mathers. Councillor Dhillon was present as substitute.

None.

RESOLVED: That the minutes of the meetings held on 30 November and 15 December 2021 be approved as a correct record.

The Committee was reminded that the report for agenda item 10 was published as a supplementary agenda.

It was confirmed that all items would be considered in public.

RESOLVED:  That under the provisions provided by Committee Standing Orders, that the Committee agrees to the updated Temporary Covid-19 Protocol.

The Committee received a report requesting consideration of the standardisation of time limits for submission of additional information and written representations to no less than 48 hours prior to a meeting – consistent with the rules for those attending to speak in person. Members were also requested to note the addition of legal services advice regarding privacy and a non-material amendment of the protocol by Democratic Services.

The proposal was moved, seconded and, when put to a vote, unanimously agreed.

RESOLVED:  That under the provisions provided by Committee Standing Orders, that the Committee agree to the updated Temporary Covid-19 Protocol.

Partial demolition, refurbishment and extension of the existing Cottage Hospital to provide a state-of-the-art health centre and the comprehensive redevelopment of the remaining Site to provide residential (Use Class C3) accommodation and ancillary works including car parking, cycle parking, landscaping and associated works.

Recommendations: Approve + Sec 106

RESOLVED: 

1.    That the application be approved, subject to the addendum and the following;

a.    That a condition to ensure hospital delivery in the first phase be added;

b.    That condition 42 be amended to strengthen overheating conditions;

c.    That condition 38(2d) be amended to show 69 parking spaces;

d.    That the applicants lodge a letter to confirm the board has approved the financial position to deliver a new health centre, with the letter to be circulated to Members upon receipt;

e.    That the Construction Logistics Plan wording be strengthened prior to commencement, inclusive of resident engagement strategy;

f.     That the S106 agreement be amended to include mandatory referral to the Planning Committee should future changes be requested; and

g.    That officers review plan numbers in full to ensure accuracy.

Officers introduced the application, which had been deferred from the Major Applications Planning Committee of 16 November 2021 to allow Members to conduct a site visit and for officers to prepare an updated report. The addendum was highlighted, which set out various amendments for completeness, comments from the Council’s landscape officer, and planning officer comments following receipt of additional letters from residents, the petitioner, and the applicant.

Officers set out the proposed development, inclusive of demolition and refurbishment, access arrangements, retention of the most valuable elements of the listed building, and the retention of trees for screening purposes. The height of the proposed health centre was confirmed to be four storeys, which was broadly commensurate to adjoining and nearby buildings.

A single ‘pinch point’ regarding proximity of buildings to nearby occupiers was confirmed to be marginally below the Council regulations on separation distances and was not considered to be material. A car parking space was confirmed to be removed to enable access to refuse bin storage areas.

Officers advised that on balance, the benefit of the proposed new health centre was considered to outweigh any potential harm resulting from the site development, and the application was therefore recommended for approval subject to the addendum and amendment to conditions 42 and 38(2d), to strengthen overheating conditions and to show 69 parking spaces.

A petitioner addressed the Committee in objection to the application. Points raised included:

·         Due to its scale and bulk, the application constituted overdevelopment for the area;

·         Several other similar developments had been refused, including in Barnet, due to perceived harm to neighbourhoods and contravention of Council policies;

·         The increase in height, from 3 to 4 storeys, was not marginal, being a 33% increase;

·         Officers and developers should protect residents and consider applications based on planning principles rather than financial grounds;

·         Residents had concerns over the safety of balcony play areas, the level of sunlight available through windows (as set out within the sunlight report), the resulting lack of sunlight’s impact on human rights, and car parking provision within the PTAL assessment (particularly accessible spaces);

·         It was requested that the application be refused.

The applicant addressed the Committee. Points raised included:

·         The proposed health centre would benefit over circa 20,000 residents;

·         The applicant had widely consulted with stakeholders including the CCG, the Council, residents, patients and carers;

·         It was confirmed that the applicant had sufficient capital funding available to carry out the required works during the next financial year;

·         The density of the proposed development, together with its car parking provision, was deemed acceptable under London and Local Plan guidelines;

·         Issues of light and overlooking had been discussed with residents and improvements to windows and screening had been built into the design to address concerns;

·         In correction to the officer’s report, the parking space was not being removed and there were no changes to current access from Neal Close;

·         It was requested that the application be approved.

The Committee sought additional information from the applicant regarding funding. In response, the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 83.

Deed of Variation to Section 106 legal agreement Schedule 4 (Affordable Housing) associated with planning permission ref: 59872/APP/2019/3852 dated 02-11-20 (Redevelopment of the site to provide a mixed-use development comprising 134 residential units (C3 Use Class) and ground floor commercial floorspace (flexible A1/A2/A3/A5/B1 Use Class), with associated car parking, cycle parking and landscaping) to enable the provision of 100% Affordable Housing.

Recommendations: Approve + Sec 106

RESOLVED:  That the application be approved + Sec 106.

Officers introduced the application which was seeking a Deed of Variation (DoV) to a legal agreement of a previously consented scheme, to secure all 134 units (100%) as affordable housing units. The Committee was advised that the applicant had agreed to a healthcare contribution of £162,682 in lieu of the reduced CIL payments. The application was recommended for approval.

The officer’s recommendation was moved, seconded, and when put to a vote, unanimously agreed.

RESOLVED:  That the application be approved + Sec 106.

Re-development of the vacant Site to provide a residential development comprising 131 (C3) residential units, with associated amenity areas, landscaping, car parking and all ancillary and enabling works.

Recommendations: Approve + Sec 106

RESOLVED:  That the application be approved subject to the addendum and the following;

a.    That condition 6(2) be amended to include provision of food waste under refuse;

b.    That condition 6 be amended to include 17 semi mature street trees.

Officers introduced the application, which was seeking approval for a development comprising 131 no. residential units (Use Class C3). It was highlighted that the site had been vacant since 2008.

Officers confirmed that the affordable housing offer was the maximum viable affordable housing provision possible. The proposed development was considered acceptable with regard to its impact on neighbour amenity, access, security, landscaping, and parking provision. Agreed local highway improvement works would complement the intensified use of the site and would  be  a  benefit   of  the  scheme.  It was confirmed that there were to be no windows on the southern elevations, while existing trees would be retained alongside further planting.

Regarding height and scale, it was confirmed that the proposed height was comparable to buildings within local surroundings. A 6m setback would allow planting of street trees which would benefit local air quality. It was highlighted that the units proposed were 3 bed, 5 person units. The application was recommended for approval.

Members raised concerns regarding crime, with reference made to nearby car parks which experienced theft from, and damage to, parked vehicles. Additionally, it was suggested that Millington Road experienced street racing which could endanger any pedestrians from the proposed site. In response, officers advised that the proposed car park was enclosed and secure. Regarding Millington Road, this was confirmed as unadopted highway and the Council therefore did not have power to install speeding measures.

Additional concerns raised included the consideration of density guidelines, bird roosts, overheating, electric vehicle charging points, and the recirculation of grey water within the development.

Regarding density, officers advised that guidelines had been considered within the context of the proposal as a whole, and the recommendation reflected the on-balance consideration that the application was acceptable. On bird roosts, a bird management plan was to be created and consulted on to allay any potential for bird strikes. Overheating mitigation, charging points, and the use of grey water were all conditioned.

Members requested that condition 6(2) be amended to include food waste under refuse arrangements, together with the amendment of condition 6 to mandate 17 semi mature street trees.

The officer’s recommendation, inclusive of the suggested amendments to conditions, was moved, seconded, and when put to a vote, unanimously agreed.

RESOLVED: That the application be approved subject to the addendum and the

following;

a)    That condition 6(2) be amended to include provision of food waste under refuse;

b)    That condition 6 be amended to include 17 semi mature street trees.

Demolition of existing buildings and redevelopment to provide a building up to 11 storeys comprising residential accommodation, associated landscaping, access, car parking and cycle parking. Detailed description: To provide 103 residential units (2 x studio, 57 x 1-bed, 31 x 2-bed and 13 x 3-bed)

Recommendations: Approval

RESOLVED:  That the application be approved, subject to the addendum.

Officers introduced the application and confirmed that the reason for the urgent report was to ensure that a decision was reached before 31 January, in order to retain grant funding.

Officers advised that the newly proposed S106 agreement was more viable than that previously consented to, and the application now proposed 27% affordable homes. The addendum was highlighted, which set out a corrected health contribution value in lieu of CIL money. Theapplication wasrecommended forapproval.

The officer’s recommendation was moved, seconded, and when put to a vote, unanimously agreed.

RESOLVED: That the application be approved, subject to the addendum.