PROPOSAL: redevelopment to provide a part three, four, five and part six storey building comprising of parking to ground and lower ground floors and 21 residential units to the upper floors (10 x 1 bed, 8 x 2 bed and 3 x 3 bed); landscaping; bin and cycle stores (as amended by the Addendum and Supplemental Addendum).
The Committee received representation from Ewan Maynard (objector), and Lotte Hirst (applicant), who urged the Committee to refuse and approve the application, respectively.
Councillor Marilyn Ashton proposed refusal for the following reasons:
1) the proposed development, by reason of its location and the unsuitable shared surface pedestrian access to the site, would fail to provide a high standard of design and layout and would not create a safe, secure and appropriate accessible, environment to the detriment of the living conditions of the 63 future occupiers of the 21 units, contrary to the design aspirations of the National Planning Policy Framework (2021), CS1E of Harrow Core Strategy (2012), DM1 of Harrow's Development Management Plan (2013) and D7 of the London Plan (2021); and
2) the proposal offered only one disabled parking space with no certainty as to the means by which more disabled parking spaces could be provided should the need arise, and given that the parking provided on site cannot be for the occupiers of the development, to the detriment of the amenities of the future occupiers, who may require a disabled parking space at the later date, contrary to policies CS1 Harrow's Core Strategy (2021), DM1 Harrow's Development Management Plan (2013), T6.1 of the London Plan 2021).
The proposal was seconded by Councillor Christopher Baxter, put to the vote and lost.
The Committee resolved to accept officer recommendations, and delegate to the Chief Planning Officer to amend condition 8 to ensure the car park design and management plan can accommodate two additional disabled parking bays, if needed.
The Planning Committee was asked to:
1) agree the reasons for approval as set out in the report; and
2) grant planning permission subject to authority being delegated to the Interim Chief Planning Officer in consultation with the Director of Legal and Governance Services for the completion of the Section 106 legal agreement and other enabling development and issue of the planning permission, subject to amendments to the conditions, including the insertion or deletion of condition as deemed fit and appropriate to the development or the amendments to the legal agreement as required. The Section 106 Agreement Heads of Terms would cover the following matters:
Transport and Highways
o The development to be ‘resident permit restricted’ and the developer to ensure that: (i) all marketing/advertising material makes reference to the fact that; and (ii) all sales and lettings agreements contain a covenant to the effect that; future owners, occupiers and tenants (other than those that are registered disabled) will not be entitled to apply for a residents parking permit or a visitor parking permit.
Children and Young People’s Play space
o A financial contribution of £2,280 to fund off-site provision (including enhancements to existing provision where appropriate) of play space and equipment.
o A financial contribution prior to commencement of the development for the shortfall in on-site carbon reductions required to achieve net zero carbon in line with the GLA rates (to be determined based on a revised energy strategy that reflects a more detailed assessment). Verification of post-completion or final on-site emissions will inform any further offset contribution that may be required.
Decentralised Energy Network
o Sufficient space and a safeguarded route to allow connection to any future district decentralised energy network.
Design Review and Design Code
o An undertaking by the developer to the existing architect (or one of equivalent standard) until the development is completed; or, the submission of a Design Code for approval by the Council that details the quality of the external materials of the finished development and other design parameters.
Employment and Training
o A financial contribution to be paid by the developer to fund local employment and training programmes and the submission of a Training and Recruitment Plan;
o The developer to use all reasonable endeavours to secure the use of local suppliers and apprentices during the construction of the development; and
o Submission of an Employment Management Plan
Legal costs, administration and monitoring
o A financial contribution (to be agreed) to be paid by the developer to the Council to reimburse the Council’s legal costs associated with the preparation of the planning obligation and a further contribution (to be agreed) to be paid to reimburse the Council’s administrative costs associated with monitoring compliance with the obligation terms.
That if the Section 106 Agreement is not completed by 31 March 2022 or such extended period as may be agreed in writing by the Interim Chief Planning Officer, the section 106 Planning Obligation is not completed, then delegate the decision to the Divisional Director of Planning to REFUSE planning permission for the appropriate reason.
The proposed development, in the absence of a Legal Agreement to provide appropriate improvements, benefits and monitoring that directly relate to the development, would fail to adequately mitigate the impact of the development on the wider area and provide for necessary social, environmental and physical infrastructural improvements arising directly from the development, contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework (2021), Policies D4, S4, SI2, T4, T6, T6.1 and DF1 of The London Plan (2021), Policy CS1 of the Harrow Core Strategy (2012) and Policies DM12, DM28, DM42, DM43, DM50, of the Harrow Development Management Policies Local Plan (2013) and the Harrow Planning Obligations SPD (2013).
The Committee wished it to be recorded that the decision to grant the application, and delegate to the Chief Planning Officer to amend condition 8 to ensure the car park design and management plan can accommodate two additional disabled parking bays if needed, was by Chair’s Casting Vote.
Councillors Brown, Parekh and Shah voted to grant the application.
Councillor Maru abstained from voting on the application.
Councillors Ashton, Baxter and Stevenson voted against the application.
Councillor Parekh, as Chair, used the Chair’s Casting Vote, to grant the application.