Agenda, decisions and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Adam Bennett with Councillor Farhad Choubedar substituting.

None.

None.

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

Full planning permission for site clearance and preparation, including the demolition of remaining buildings, and the redevelopment of the site to provide three energy centres, two visitor reception centres, a new footpath and cycleway link to the canal towpath, works to the highway, car parking, cycle parking, associated infrastructure, enclosures and necessary physical security systems, hard and soft landscaping, and ancillary uses, as well as associated external works.

Recommendation: Approval + Section 106

RESOLVED: That the application be approved.

Full planning permission for site clearance and preparation, including the demolition of remaining buildings, and the redevelopment of the site to provide three energy centres, two visitor reception centres, a new footpath and cycleway link to the canal towpath, works to the highway, car parking, cycle parking, associated infrastructure, enclosures and necessary physical security systems, hard and soft landscaping, and ancillary uses, as well as associated external works

Officers introduced the application highlighting the site already had planning permission for a data centre campus and that the application in front of Members was a drop-in application to the substantive parent permission already granted. The application sought permission for part of the site to increase the number of energy centres from two to three, and to increase the number of visitor reception centres from one to two; this was to enable multiple operators to function on site. The proposal was deemed an appropriate use of a strategic industrial location and public realm improvements were proposed within the demise of the site including highway improvement works and canal access ramp enhancements. In addition to this the economic and employment benefits of the proposal had been given significant weight. The application was recommended for approval subject to the officers advised conditions and an established Section 106 agreement

Members noted that the proposals represented an overall improvement to what currently existed on the site. The Committee queried the Council’s powers if the air quality and carbon offset details were not adhered to, officers noted that, should the legal agreement not be signed, officers would then be delegated the authority to refuse planning permission on the grounds highlighted on page five of the agenda pack.

With regard to the proposed conditions 19 and 20 pertaining to operational plant noise control and standby generator noise control, Members questioned whether noise levels would be monitored once the site was operational, as had been recently conditioned with a similar application for a data centre elsewhere in the Borough. Officers clarified that the operational noise levels relating to the application in front of Members had been subject to a noise assessment whereas the other similar application referred to had not; this meant that ongoing monitoring of noise was not required by condition on this application, although noise limitation had been addressed by condition.

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

RESOLVED: That the application be approved as per the officer’s recommendations.

Redevelopment of the site to erect a part 10 storey and part 11 storey residential led development comprising 127 flats and residents lounge with associated access (including Public Access Improvements) and landscaping works following demolition of existing light industrial building (Amended plans submitted 19/04/22).

Recommendation: Approval + Section 106

RESOLVED: That the application be approved.

Redevelopment of the site to erect a part 10 storey and part 11 storey residential led development comprising 127 flats and residents lounge with associated access (including Public Access Improvements) and landscaping works following demolition of existing light industrial building (Amended plans submitted 19/04/22)

Officers introduced the item and gave Members an overview of the application. It was highlighted that a similar development on the site was refused permission in 2018 and upon appeal by the applicant, the Planning Inspectorate upheld the decision to refuse permission on the grounds of the proposed scheme’s design, overbearing development and the scheme conflicting with the details of the site allocation. Members were shown a masterplan of the immediate area showing a prospective arrangement of how future development may come forward, although it was highlighted that the plan was indicative in nature and had not received planning consent; this had been requested by officers to ensure adjoining developments in the immediate vicinity would not blight one another. Officers also highlighted that the proposal’s 35% affordable housing allocation represented a significant increase in affordable units following discussions with the applicant. The benefits of the scheme were deemed to outweigh any potential harm and the application was recommended for approval subject to the proposed planning conditions, a Section 106 agreement and a Stage 2 Mayoral referral.

The Committee commended officers for their work and noted that the scheme was considered a car light development with seven disabled parking spaces provided. Officers noted that Viveash Close was not currently within a controlled parking zone (CPZ), however there were planning obligations to ensure a consultation on options to include Viveash Close in a CPZ. It was also highlighted that the site currently had a PTAL rating of 4 and was moving towards a rating of 5. It was deemed that within PTAL 4/5 areas, the local planning authority should be supporting car light developments, discouraging parking and ensuring that there were adequate measures in place to minimise car use. Members queried the potential impact this could have on parking pressures within nearby roads which were not subject to their own parking restrictions; it was noted that prospective residents would have strong local access to shops, services and facilities in addition to good public transportation links in bus and rail services. Officers highlighted that instances of car parking displacement leading to parking stresses on other nearby roads would be mitigated through a mix of parking restrictions and enhancing opportunity for transport by alternative means, namely public transport.

Members questioned what measures were in place to ensure privacy between residents using their balconies as private amenity space and sought to amend condition 7 to ensure details would be known as to any balcony screens.

The Committee sought clarification on how the amount of financial contribution towards child play space was calculated, to which officers noted that child play space contributions were based on a formula within the Planning Obligations SPD 2014 which included reference to the number of children and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 149.

Demolition of the existing office and warehouse/workshops, with the retention of Gethceln House (as an office), and erection of a flexible use class E(g)(iii)/B2/B8 building comprising 3 units with associated access and parking.

Recommendation: Approval + Section 106

RESOLVED: That the application be approved.

Demolition of the existing office and warehouse/workshops, with the retention of Gethceln House (as an office), and erection of a flexible use class E(g)(iii)/B2/B8 building comprising 3 units with associated access and parking

Officers introduced the item giving an overview of the application and noting that the principle of the development had already been established by earlier consents; it was highlighted that the scale, mass and bulk of the development were unchanged from the previous approval and the primary change would be the retention of Gethceln House to provide a further 126square metres of employment space. Members’ attention was drawn to the addendum which sought to secure a fire statement by way of condition. The changes to the scheme were not deemed to raise any planning policy conflicts and therefore the application was recommended for approval.

With regard to pedestrian safety, the Committee queried whether potential issues may arise regarding pedestrian and driver sight lines from vehicles leaving the site onto Dawley Road. Officers confirmed that vehicular access to and from the site was subject to the Council’s commercial vehicle crossover standards however the site travel plan could be updated to include measures to improve pedestrian safety through the quality of the walking environment.

The officer’s recommendation, inclusive of the proposed fire statement condition in the addendum and the updates to the travel plan to address pedestrian safety, was moved, seconded, and when put to a vote, unanimously agreed.

RESOLVED:

1)    That the application be approved;

2)    That the proposed Fire Statement condition be added; and

3)    That the Travel Plan be updated to include measures to improve the safety of the pedestrian walking environment.

Change of use of former residential school (Use Class C2) to education facility (Use Class F.1), two storey extension to provide additional teaching space, construction of a Multi-Use Games Area, revised vehicular access, landscaping, car and cycle parking, and associated works.

Recommendation: Approval + Section 106

RESOLVED: That the application be approved.

Change of use of former residential school (Use Class C2) to education facility (Use Class F.1), two storey extension to provide additional teaching space, construction of a Multi-Use Games Area, revised vehicular access, landscaping, car and cycle parking, and associated works.

Officers introduced the item and gave an overview of the application. Members’ attention was drawn to the addendum which proposed to amend the wording of a number of conditions as required by the Greater London Authority. There were also a number of verbal updates to the proposed conditions following officers’ discussions with Transport for London, these included:

• That condition 8 be updated to include 5 additional cycle spaces for students and to secure a ‘Wayfinding Strategy’ to signpost site visitors entering and exiting the site;
• That condition 16 be amended to include cycle management and maintenance details; and
• That a new condition be included to provide a full road safety audit of the new eastern vehicular access point;

Officers highlighted in their presentation that the proposals were deemed not to have a significant visual impact as the development was screened on three sides by existing school buildings and vegetation, and sat within the silhouette of existing school buildings. The proposal was considered appropriate development and was grounded in the provision of much needed additional SEND school places, the application was recommended for approval subject to the proposed planning conditions, a Section 106 agreement and a Stage 2 Mayoral referral.

The Committee highlighted that Northwood Road was an especially busy road during school pick up and drop off times and sought to ensure that driver sight lines weren’t blocked by the bus stop, telephone pole and greenery situated at the exit onto Northwood Road. Officers confirmed that the proposals adhered to all sight line requirements.

Members sought to ensure that appropriate measures were taken during construction to ensure the road was kept clean and free of construction debris and dirt; additionally, that due consideration was given to minimising disruption to students during the school’s operational hours. Officers confirmed that condition 4, with regard to the construction management and logistics plan, could be amended to include details regarding wheel washing of construction vehicles leaving the site and consideration of school hours and student safety, although it was noted that general construction codes of practice would address working hours and public safety.

The Committee noted that the application was on green belt land, however it was deemed that the purpose of providing additional SEND school places was an appropriate use of this land. The officer’s recommendation, inclusive of the additional amendments to conditions discussed, the verbal updates from officers and the amendments highlighted in the addendum, was moved, seconded, and when put to a vote, unanimously agreed.

RESOLVED:

1)    That the application be approved;

2)    That condition 8 be updated to include 5 additional cycle spaces for students and to secure a ‘Wayfinding Strategy’ to signpost site visitors entering and exiting the site;

3)    That condition 16 be amended to include cycle  ...  view the full minutes text for item 151.