Agenda and minutes

The minutes of the meeting of 11 September 2018 were agreed as an accurate record.

There were no apologies for absence.

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. 

Councillor Alex Karmel declared a non-pecuniary interest in respect of 68-72 Hammersmith Road as he sometimes shopped at Harrods. He remained in the meeting, participated and voted on the item.

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.

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

The Committee heard a representation in objection to the application from a local resident. Some of the points raised included: The bulk and scale of the extensions would be detrimental to the character and appearance of the property and the surrounding area. The proposal would be harmful to neighbour amenity and include loss of outlook, daylight and sunlight. The height of the ground floor side extension was excessive and the proposed basement unit differed from what was set out in the construction statement. Excessive noise and disturbance would be created during the construction phase. Further points included: the application did not include a demolition statement or address these risks. The proposal to introduce three flats to application site constituted an over development of the site.

During the course of discussions, the Committee explored a number of issues including the proposed design / materials and its effect on the local street scene. Further topics included an examination of the basement, its size and scale as well as the associated flood risks. Councillor Alex Karmel proposed that a missing condition, pertaining to the correct height of the proposal. This was seconded by Councillor Matt Thorley.

The Committee voted on application 2018/01439/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, the inclusion of the additional condition (as set out above) and 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

            RESOLVED THAT:

Planning Application 2018/01439/FUL be refused for the following reasons:

·           The height and bulk of the proposal.

·           Not in keeping with the street scene.

·           The proposed choice of materials were unclear

·           An un neighbourly form of development with increased overlooking

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

The Committee heard a representation in support of the application from the agent. Some of the points raised included: the application sought much needed office space which would enhance the working environment and facilities for employees. If approved, the proposal would create additional employment and benefit the local area.The design incorporated modern and flexible office space. The proposal would have no highways impact and the design incorporated sufficient car parking and cycle space. The proposal incorporated a high quality design which would improve the existing building, regenerating the area and have a positive impact on heritage assets.

During the course of discussions, the Committee explored a number of issues including car parking facilities, daylight / sunlight impacts and the use of the roof terrace including the potential noise and disturbance. Other points included: local community contributions, employment opportunities and the use of S106 contributions for local cycle schemes. 

Councillor Wesley Harcourt proposed an amendment to Condition 13, limiting the use of the roof terrace from 8 am to 9:30 pm only. This was seconded by Councillor Alex Karmel.

The Committee voted on application 2017/02883/FUL and whether to agree the officer recommendation of approval, the amendment to Condition 13 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

RESOLVED THAT:

Planning Application 2017/02883/FUL be approved, subject to the amendment to Condition 13, addendum and:

1) Subject to there being no contrary direction from the Mayor for London that the Committee resolve that the Strategic Director for 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 for 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

Referring to the addendum, officers proposed a number of changes as follows: On the last page of addendum page 383, Point D under the Heads of Terms, officers refered to the replacement of “not to exceed” with “estimated cost of”. Committee members noted that this applied throughout the report when these costs were referenced.

On page 384 under the Heads of Terms in relation to point I and the Youth Centre.  There was an additional requirement given on-going negotiations with the applicant; therefore the following amendment was added to point I:

“Should there be an increase in residential floorspace in the future; a minimum of 35% affordable housing should be maintained on site with provision that the Youth Facility could be increased up to circa. 12,000 sq.ft in floorspace; if not delivered payment in lieu of up to £8,000,000 to be made”.

On page 384, Point H, under the Heads of Terms: A financial contribution towards Employment and Training initiatives to be agreed and no less than £250,000.  

The Committee heard a representation in support of the application from the agent. Some of the points raised included: the developer had worked in close partnership with the Council and the proposals had evolved over the past three years. The proposal would create 1,843 additional homes, 35% of which would be affordable. It was anticipated that 40% of the affordable homes would be low cost rental accommodation. Should the proposal be approved, it would result in a £90 million Community Infrastructure Levey payment to the Authority which would benefit the local community. The proposal incorporated a youth centre and food bank, the refurbishment of four buildings and significant employment and training opportunities.

During the course of discussions, the Committee explored a number of issues including: access to the war memorials during the construction phases and the impact of the proposal on the listed building and highways. The Committee specifically asked whether the sums mentioned in the Heads of Terms would be index linked and what scope there was within the Heads of Terms to reallocate S106 monies should the food bank not be required. Further topics included: how the public and private amenity space would operate in practice.

Points were raised about the noise and disruption caused during the construction phases and the when the tranches of affordable housing would be delivered within the overall project. The Committee also asked about local infrastructure impacts and specifically when funding towards the Imperial Wharf station would be made available.

The Committee voted on application  2018/02100/COMB 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: 5

Against: 3

Not Voting: 0

RESOLVED THAT:

Planning Application 2018/02100/COMB be approved for the reasons set out in the report, the changes to the Heads of Terms (as set out above) and addendum as follows:

1) Subject to there being no contrary direction from the Mayor for  ...  view the full minutes text for item 102.

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

The Committee heard a representation in support of the application from the agent. The main points raised were the applicant had scaled back the massing and had included an element of affordable work space within the proposal.

The Committee discussed the application and the following issues were explored: the likely impact on traffic generation, given its proximity to Olympia and the service and delivery implications. Further topics included the intended hours of operation of the terraces.

Councillor Wesley Harcourt proposed an amendment to Condition 13, limiting the use of the roof terrace from 8 am to 9:30 pm only. This was seconded by Councillor Alex Karmel.

Councillor Wesley Harcourt noted the reference within the report to cycle funding (s106 and CIL) towards CS 9 and proposed that this wording be amended to state a more general “contribution to cycling”. This was seconded by Councillor Alex Karmel.

The Committee voted on application 2017/04752/FUL and whether to agree the officer recommendation of approval, two amendments (listed above) and the changes set out in the addendum. This was put to the vote and the result was as follows:

For: 6

Against: 2

Not Voting: 0

RESOLVED THAT:

Planning Application 2017/04752/FUL be approved for the reasons set out in the report, the two amendments and addendum.

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

The Committee voted on application 2018/02377/RES 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 2018/02377/RES be approved for the reasons set out in the report and addendum.

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

Introducing the report, officers asked that a landscaping condition be attached to secure the implementation and retention of the proposed planting.

The Committee voted on application 2018/01856/FUL and whether to (1) agree the officer recommendation to grant permission asset out in the report, addendum and the additional landscaping condition as set out above and (2) authorise the Strategic Director for 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, any such changes shall be within their discretion. This was put to the vote and the result was as follows:

For: 6

Against: 2

Not Voting: 0

RESOLVED THAT:

Planning Application 208/01856/FUL be approved for the reasons set out in the report, the addition of condition 45 and addendum.