Agenda and minutes

RESOLVED: To note the attendance at this meeting of the following duly appointed Reserve Members:-

RESOLVED:  That, in accordance with Committee Procedure Rule 4.1, the following Councillors, who were not Members of the Committee, be allowed to speak on the agenda item indicated:

RESOLVED:  To note that the following interests were declared:

Agenda Item 10 – Planning Applications Received (item 1/02)

Councillor Barry Kendler  declared a non-pecuniary interest in that he lived in the vicinity of the application site.  He would remain in the room whilst the matter was considered and voted upon.

CouncillorPritesh Patel declared a non-pecuniary interest in that his daughter attended Avanti House School.  He would leave the room whilst the matter was considered and voted upon.

That the minutes of the meeting held on 25 May 2016 be taken as read and signed as a correct record.

RESOLVED:  That the minutes of the meeting held on 25 May 2016 be taken as read and signed as a correct record, subject to the following amendment on page 8:

CouncillorPritesh Patel declared a non-pecuniary interest in that his daughter attended Avanti House School.  He would leave the room whilst the matter was considered and voted upon.

To receive any public questions received in accordance with Committee Procedure Rule 17 (Part 4B of the Constitution).

Questions will be asked in the order notice of them was received and there be a time limit of 15 minutes.

[The deadline for receipt of public questions is 3.00 pm, Friday 24 June 2016.  Questions should be sent to publicquestions@harrow.gov.uk  

No person may submit more than one question].

RESOLVED:  To note that none were received.

RESOLVED:  To note the receipt of the following petition, which was referred to the Corporate Director, Community for consideration:

A Petition containing 204 signatures with the following terms of reference:

We, the undersigned object to planning applications P/1014/16 and P/1022/16 in respect of John Lyon School pupil expansion and accompanying traffic plan.

To receive references from Council and any other Committees or Panels (if any).

1.    To receive a Reference from the Special Meeting of the Traffic and Road Safety Advisory Panel meeting of 27 June 2016.

RESOLVED:  To note the Reference from the Special meeting of the Traffic and Road Safety Advisory Panel on 27 June 2016.

To confirm whether representations are to be received, under Committee Procedure Rule 29 (Part 4B of the Constitution), from objectors and applicants regarding planning applications on the agenda.

RESOLVED:  That in accordance with the provisions of Committee Procedure Rule 30 (Part 4B of the Constitution), representations be received in respect of items  1/02, 2/01, 2/05, 2/07 and 2/08 on the list of planning applications.

Report of the Divisional Director, Planning - circulated separately.

Members are reminded that, in accordance with the Planning Protocol, where Councillors disagree with the advice of the Divisional Director, Planning, it will be the Members' responsibility to clearly set out the reasons for refusal where the Officer recommendation is for grant.  The planning reasons for rejecting the Officer's advice must be clearly stated, whatever the recommendation and recorded in the minutes.  The Officer must be given the opportunity to explain the implications of the contrary decision.

cIn accordance with the Local Government (Access to Information) Act 1985, the Addendum was admitted late to the agenda as it contained information relating to various items on the agenda and was based on information received after the despatch of the agenda.  It was admitted to the agenda in order to enable Members to consider all information relevant to the items before them for decision.

RESOLVED:  That authority be given to the Head of Planning to issue the decision notices in respect of the applications considered.

1/01 –  GREENHILL SERVICE STATION, MARSH ROAD, PINNER

REFERENCE:  P/5932/15 (Churchill Retirement Living)

DESCRIPTION:  Redevelopment: Construction Of A Five Storey Building To Provide 29 Bedroom Sheltered Retirement Flats (Use Class C3) With Parking Bin / Buggy Storage And Landscaping (Demolition Of Existing Petrol Station)

An officer advised that the application had in error been listed in the agenda as being Use Class C2 and that this should read Use Class C3.

Following questions from Members, an officer advised that:

·                     the mix of housing was considered to be appropriate and in line with the aspirations of the London Plan and the Core Strategy.  The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) sought to encourage a modal shift, and the site was to be a sheltered retirement development located in sustainable location ie it was in a District Centre, close to amenities with a good PTAL rating and close to other District Centres and the Town Centre.  The level of parking offered was within London Plan policies and the Highways Authority was of the view that this was an appropriate level for this type of location and there was a condition of approval restricting residents from applying for parking permits and the  Submission of a Travel Plan;

·                     although planning policies and strategies provided guidance regarding how much parking should be available at such developments, it was not prescriptive in this. In any case, the levels of available parking at such developments was typically shaped by market forces.  Potential buyers and tenants would be made aware of the limited parking provision and that they would not be eligible for a Resident Parking Permit or Visitors Parking Permit to park a motor vehicle where a CPZ has been implemented unless they held a Disabled Person’s Badge;

·                     condition 21 required the development to be carried out in accordance with the approved Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) and mitigation measures to ensure that the development would not exacerbate the risk of flooding within the site or increase the risk and consequences of flooding elsewhere.

a Member proposed deferring the item on the following grounds:

1.            To allow the applicant the opportunity to re-consider and increase the levels of parking provision at the development.

The motion to defer was seconded, put to the vote and lost.

Officers advised that it would not be possible to increase the number of parking spaces at the development without losing some of the area designated for refuse and buggy storage or by substantially altering the design  ...  view the full minutes text for item 254.