Agenda and minutes

Planning and Development Control Committee
Tuesday, 6th November, 2018 7.00 pm

Venue: Committee Room 1 - Hammersmith Town Hall. View directions

Contact: Charles Francis, Committee Cordinator  Tel: 020 8753 2062

Items
No. Item

106.

Minutes pdf icon PDF 134 KB

To approve as an accurate record, and the Chair to sign, the minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 9 October 2018.

Minutes:

RESOLVED THAT:

 

The minutes of the meeting of 9 October 2018 were agreed as an accurate record.

 

107.

Apologies for Absence

Minutes:

There were no apologies for absence.

 

108.

Declaration of Interests

If a Councillor has a disclosable pecuniary interest in a particular item, whether or not it is entered in the Authority’s register of interests, or any other significant interest which they consider should be declared in the public interest, they should declare the existence and, unless it is a sensitive interest as defined in the Member Code of Conduct, the nature of the interest at the commencement of the consideration of that item or as soon as it becomes apparent.

 

At meetings where members of the public are allowed to be in attendance and speak, any Councillor with a disclosable pecuniary interest or other significant interest may also make representations, give evidence or answer questions about the matter.  The Councillor must then withdraw immediately from the meeting before the matter is discussed and any vote taken.

 

Where Members of the public are not allowed to be in attendance and speak, then the Councillor with a disclosable pecuniary interest should withdraw from the meeting whilst the matter is under consideration. Councillors who have declared other significant interests should also withdraw from the meeting if they consider their continued participation in the matter would not be reasonable in the circumstances and may give rise to a perception of a conflict of interest.

 

Councillors are not obliged to withdraw from the meeting where a dispensation to that effect has been obtained from the Audit, Pensions and Standards Committee. 

Minutes:

Councillor Alex Karmel declared a non-pecuniary interest in respect of 4-5 Sotheron Place as his daughter had attended a birthday party at the climbing centre.

 

 

109.

Decision to reorder the agenda

Minutes:

In view of members of the public present for particular applications the Chair proposed that the agenda be re-ordered, with which the Committee agreed, and the minutes reflect the order of the meeting.

 

 

110.

4-5 Sotheron Place, London, SW6 2EJ pdf icon PDF 48 KB

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Please see the Addendum attached to the minutes which made minor changes to the report.

 

Councillor Alex Karmel declared a non-pecuniary interest in respect of 4-5 Sotheron Place as his daughter had attended a birthday party at the climbing centre.

 

The Committee heard a representation in objection to the application from a Planning representative, speaking on behalf of local residents. Some of the points raised included: A report submitted by Quadrant Planning in objection to the scheme had not been included in the objections section of the officer report. The scale and massing of the proposal was excessive, and should it be approved, it would undermine the setting of the Moore Park Conservation Area.  Block B would be harmful to neighbour amenity and include a loss of outlook, sunlight and daylight. The commercial floor space windows were openable and these raised privacy concerns. There was insufficient residential and commercial car parking which would cause local parking pressures.

 

The Committee heard a representation in support of the application from the Agent. Some of the points raised included: The Applicant had undertaken an extensive dialogue with residents over a two-year period. The proposal would enhance the visual amenity of the local area. The height had been reduced, the design revised and a new façade had been submitted.  The proposal offered 36% affordable housing and was a mixed-use scheme. The proposal would provide new employment opportunities in the local area. The design was sympathetic to local residents and amenity and privacy were achieved. Daylight and sunlight studies had been conducted and although there would be some overshadowing to some gardens, these were within parameters and were acceptable in planning terms.

 

During discussions, the Committee explored a number of issues including the omission of the Quadrant report, the transition elements of the design and its scale and overlooking.  The daylight and sunlight impact of the design as well as the levels of affordable housing which were achieved. Further concerns included: Its failure to meet the co² target, the lack of social housing within the scheme, the ability to open windows and the lack of glazed fenestration to the commercial space.

 

Referencing the Quadrant report, Councillor Alex Karmel proposed that windows within the commercial space should be glazed and remain shut at all times. This was seconded by Councillor Matt Thorley.

 

The Committee voted on application 2018/01598/FUL and whether to agree the officer recommendation of approval and the changes set out in the addendum. This was put to the vote and the result was as follows:

 

For:

1

Against:

7

Not Voting:

0

 

The Committee voted on a motion to refuse the application. This was put to the vote and the result was as follows:

 

For:

8

Against:

0

Not Voting:

0

 

            RESOLVED THAT:

 

Planning Application 2018/01598/FUL be refused for the following reasons:

  • The proposed tenure mix of affordable housing is unsatisfactory as it includes no affordable rent.
  • The scale and the massing of the proposal has an un-neighbourly outlook impact on Cambria  ...  view the full minutes text for item 110.

111.

Land at Rigeley Mews, London NW10

Minutes:

Please see the Addendum attached to the minutes which amended the report.

 

The Committee heard representations in objection to the application from two local residents. Some of the points raised included: The proposal was an overdevelopment of the site. The proposal would have a number of negative impacts such as: privacy, light, noise and disturbance. The development might mean that it was occupied by up to 20 people. The proposed design incorporated a stairwell covered by glass which would enable overlooking into neighbouring properties. An overdevelopment of the site would also pose access and egress issues for the emergency services. The ODPC were already constructing 25,000 new homes in the vicinity so those proposed were not required locally.  The construction of a basement to a nearby property had caused £80k worth of damage to an adjoining property so the over-development of Victorian housing stock was a concern.

 

The Committee heard a representation in support of the application from the agent. Some of the points raised included: On a technical basis, the proposal had not become a series of flats. The proposal would be subservient to the surrounding area.  The design had attempted to limit its effects on massing.

 

During the course of discussions, the Committee explored a number of issues including the access and egress of the emergency services, the design and its impact on the local street scene, as well as privacy and overlooking concerns. Further points included: The impact of the proposal on neighbours during the construction phases. 

 

The Committee voted on application 2018/01943/FUL and whether to agree the officer recommendations of approval, and the changes set out in the addendum. This was put to the vote and the result was as follows:

 

For:

7

Against:

1

Not Voting:

0

 

Councillor Wesley Harcourt requested his vote in objection to the proposal be formally recorded.

 

 

 

RESOLVED THAT:

 

Planning Application 2018/01943/FUL be approved, subject to the addendum.

 

1)    That the Committee resolve that the Strategic Director, Growth and Place, be authorised to determine the application and grant permission upon the completion of a satisfactory legal agreement and subject to the conditions listed below.

 

2)    To authorise the Strategic Director, Growth and Place, after consultation with the Director of Law and the Chair of the Planning and Development Control Committee to make any minor changes to the proposed conditions or heads of terms of the legal agreement, any such changes shall be within their discretion.

 

 

112.

82 Rannoch Road, London, W6 9SP

Minutes:

Introducing the report, officers referred to the changes set out in the addendum and in particular, that the second Officer recommendation be deleted and replaced with:‘2) To authorise the Strategic Director of Growth and Place in consultation with the Director of Law and approval of the Chair of the Planning and Development Control Committee to make any minor modifications to the proposed conditions in this report which may include the variation, addition or deletion of the conditions, any such changes shall be within their discretion’

 

The Committee heard several representations in objection to the application from local residents. Some of the points raised included: The proposal would lead to the loss of the residential character of the property and would be out of keeping with the street scene. Concerns were raised about the number of potential occupants living within the premises and what the short-term tenancy arrangements might be. The proposal would cause noise and disturbance during the construction phase and be harmful to car parking locally. If approved, the proposal would set a precedent which might lead to an increased loss of family dwellings in the local area.

 

Councillor Guy Vincent spoke as ward Councillor for Fulham Reach against the application.

 

During the course of discussions, the Committee explored a number of issues including: How it was envisaged the property would operate and the number of roof lights. Further points included: the area profile of the Conservation Area and whether or not the proposal would represent an over intensification of the use of the site.

 

The Committee voted on application 2018/02523/FUL and whether to agree both officer recommendations as amended at the meeting and the changes set out in the addendum. This was put to the vote and the result was as follows

 

 

 

Officer Recommendation 1

For:

6

Against:

2

Not Voting:

0

 

Officer Recommendation 2

For:

7

Against:

1

Not Voting:

0

 

RESOLVED THAT:

 

Planning Application 2018/02523/FUL be approved for the reasons set out in the report, the changes to the recommendations made at the meeting and addendum.

 

1)    That the Committee resolve that the Strategic Director for Growth and Place be authorised to determine the application and grant permission subject to the conditions listed (below)

 

2)    To authorise the Strategic Director of Growth and Place in consultation with the Director of Law and approval of the Chair of the Planning and Development Control Committee to make any minor modifications to the proposed conditions in this report which may include the variation, addition or deletion of the conditions, any such changes shall be within their discretion’

 

113.

Woodlands, 80 Wood Lane, London

Minutes:

Please see the Addendum attached to the minutes which amended the report.

 

Councillor Alex Karmel noted there were some inaccuracies in Table 4.4 on pages  32 and 33 of the agenda and proposed an amendment to rectify these. This was seconded by Councillor Matt Thorley.

 

The Committee voted on application  2018/01234/FUL and whether to agree the officer recommendation of approval, amendment (listed above) and the changes set out in the addendum. This was put to the vote and the result was as follows:

 

 

For:

8

Against:

0

Not Voting:

0

 

RESOLVED THAT:

 

Planning Application 2018/01234/FUL be approved for the reasons set out in the report, the amendment and addendum.

 

114.

Woodlands, 80 Woodlane, London W6 9SP

Minutes:

Addendum Please see the attached to the minutes which amended the report.

 

The Committee voted on application 2018/01256/VAR and whether to agree the officer recommendations set out in the report and changes set out in the addendum. This was put to the vote and the result was as follows:

 

For:

8

Against:

0

Not Voting:

0

 

RESOLVED THAT:

 

Planning Application 2018/01256/VAR be approved for the reasons set out in the report and addendum.

 

 

Addendum pdf icon PDF 64 KB