Agenda and minutes

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

RESOLVED:  That no Members, who were not members of the Committee, had indicated that they wished to speak at the meeting.

RESOLVED:  To note that the following interests were declared:

Agenda Item 12H (2/08) – Other Applications Recommended for Grant

Councillors Stephen Greek, Anjana Patel & Bharat Thakker declared non-pecunairy interests in that the applicant was a colleague and Member of the Conservative Group.  They would leave the room whilst the matter was considered and voted upon.

That the minutes of the meeting held on 25 July 2018 be taken as read and signed as a correct record.

RESOLVED:  That the minutes of the meeting held on 25 July 2018 be taken as read and signed as a correct record.

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 in which they were received.  There will be a time limit of 15 minutes for the asking and answering of public questions.

[The deadline for receipt of public questions is 3.00 pm, Friday

31August 2018.  Questions should be sent to publicquestions@harrow.gov.uk  

No person may submit more than one question].

RESOLVED:  To accept both addendums and the supplemental agenda.

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 item 2/03 on the list of planning applications.

PROPOSAL:  Change of use from residential (class c3) to care home (class c2)

DECISION:  Deferred, subject to a site visit.

PROPOSAL:  Use of rooms on ground floor for beauty treatments

Councillor Stephen Greek, Anjana Patel & Bharat Thakker left the room during consideration of this item.

Following questions and comments from Members, an officer advised that:

·                     although the London Plan sought to restrict the loss of accommodation within residential dwellings, it was nevertheless in favour of home-working, within limits;

·                     retrospective applications such as this one, though not illegal, were considered unwise and as such were not condoned by the planning service;

·                     if granted, the permission would be reviewed in two years’ time.

A Member expressed disappointment at the fact that the application had been made retrospectively.

DECISION:  GRANTED, planning permission subject to the Conditions listed in Appendix 1 of the officer report.

The Committee wished it to be recorded that the decision to grant the application was by a majority of votes.

Councillors Simon Brown, Keith Ferry & Graham Henson voted for the application.

Councillor Christine Robson abstained from voting.

PROPOSAL:  Conversion of existing internal cycle room to store room; creation of additional floor incorporating 9 flats; bin and cycle store.

Following questions and comments from Members, an officer advised that:

·                     the applicant had submitted a Waste Management Plan and officers considered that this would be sufficient to meet the needs of future occupiers and would safeguard the amenities of the local area.  If a construction management plan had been deemed necessary, then this would have been requested by the Highways authority, who had not raised any objections to the application;

·                     with regard to soft landscaping, the applicant had agreed to plant trees into the ground rather than in pots;

·                     issues raised by the objector in relation to building control did not fall within the remit of the Committee and was the responsibility of the Building Control Section. 

Members expressed their dismay regarding Permitted Development rights which allowed the conversion of office space to residential space and  whether the proposal met the relevant national building control requirements and standards.

An officer undertook to forward the concerns raised by Members to the Building Control Section.

The Committee received representations from an objector, Ms Yousif and from a representative of the applicant, Mr Butcher.

DECISION:  GRANTED

RECOMMENDATION A

Granted planning permission subject to authority being delegated to the Divisional Director of Regeneration, Enterprise and Planning in consultation with the Director of Legal and Governance Services for the completion of the Section 106 legal agreement and other enabling legislation and issue of the planning permission and subject to minor amendments to the conditions (set out in Appendix 1 of the officer report) or the legal agreement.

RECOMMENDATION B

That if the Section 106 Agreement is not completed by 31^st October 2018 or such extended period as may be agreed in writing by the Divisional Director of Planning, then delegate the decision to the Divisional Director of Planning to REFUSE planning permission for the appropriate reason.

The Committee wished it to be recorded that the decision to grant the application was by a majority of votes.

Councillors Simon Brown, Stephen Greek, Keith Ferry, Anjana Patel, Christine Robson and Bharat Thakker  voted for the application.

Councillor Graham Henson abstained from voting.

PROPOSAL:  Redevelopment to provide two storey dwellinghouse with basement and accommodation in roof; refuse storage

Following questions and comments from Members, an officer advised that following the previously refused scheme (reference P/0962/18), a number of amendments had been made to address the reasons for refusal.  Officers deemed the current application acceptable.

Members expressed dismay that the former application property had been demolished by the applicant without planning permission in order to implement the permission granted under reference P/4297/17.

a Member proposed refusal on the following grounds:

‘The proposal, by reason of its design, form and siting would represent an inappropriate, discordant and incongruous form of development, at odds with the character of the area and the prevailing pattern of development in the streetscene, contrary to the high quality design aspirations contained in the National Planning Policy Framework (2012), policies 7.4B, 7.6B and 3.5A of The London Plan (2016), policy CS1.B of the Harrow Core Strategy (2012), policy DM 1 of the Harrow Development Management Policies Local Plan (2013) and the adopted Supplementary Planning Document: Residential Design Guide (2010). ‘

The motion was seconded, put to the vote and lost.  The Chair used his casting vote.

DECISION:  GRANTED, planning permission subject to the Conditions listed in Appendix 1 of the officer report.

The Committee wished it to be recorded that the decision to grant the application was by a majority of votes.

Councillors Simon Brown, Keith Ferry &, Graham Henson voted for the application.  The Chair used his casting vote.

Councillors Stephen Greek, Anjana Patel and Bharat Thakker voted against the application.

Councillor Christine Robson abstained from Voting.

PROPOSAL:  Redevelopment to provide two storey building with habitable roofspace comprising of 5 flats (3 x 2 bedroom flats, 1 x studio flat, and 1 x 1 bedroom flat); bin and cycle stores

This application was withdrawn.

PROPOSAL: Single storey rear extension (demolition or rear extension and bin store)

This application was withdrawn.

PROPOSAL:  Change of use from gym (class D1) to offices (class b1)

DECISION:  GRANTED, planning permission subject to the Conditions listed in Appendix 1 of the officer report.

The Committee wished it to be recorded that the decision to grant the application was unanimous.

PROPOSAL: Re-development to provide one two storey building for four flats; landscaping; separate and communal amenity space; bin / cycle storage

This application was withdrawn.