Agenda and minutes

There were no apologies for absence.

At the start of the meeting the Chair will carry out a roll-call of committee members to confirm attendance. Members will also have an opportunity to declare any 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 Standards Committee.

PRESENT: Councillors Colin Aherne, Wesley Harcourt, Alex Karmel, Rachel Leighton (Chair),  Natalia Perez, Asif Siddique, Matt Thorley and Matt Uberoi.

 

Cllr Harcourt declared a non-pecuniary interest in respect of Bishop’s Park Tennis Court (2020/01261/FUL), as he was the Cabinet Member responsible for the Environment. He confirmed he would leave the meeting for the item and not vote on the application.

 

Cllr Karmel declared a non-pecuniary interest in respect of Bishop’s Park Tennis Court (2020/01261/FUL), as his daughter had received coaching there and the school she attends uses the facilities. As he considered this would not prejudice his vote, he remained in the meeting and voted on the item.

 

Councillor Matt Uberoi declared a non-pecuniary interest in respect of Bishop’s Park Tennis Court (2020/01261/FUL), as he knew one of the objectors. As he had not discussed the application with them, he considered this would not prejudice his vote, he remained in the meeting and voted on the item.

 

 

To approve as an accurate record, and the Chair to sign, the minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 7 July 2020.

The minutes of the meeting held on 7 July 2020 were agreed.

 

In view of the number of registered speakers on some items, the Chair proposed that the running order of the agenda be changed to: West London Magistrate’s Court, Bishop’s Park Tennis Court, Unit 0000C Westfield’s Shopping Centre followed by Adjacent to Cairns House. This was agreed by the Committee.

 

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

 

The Committee heard representations from two residents in objection to the application.

 

The Committee heard representations from representatives of the Applicant in support of the application.

 

The Committee heard representations from Councillor PJ Murphy, Ward Councillor and Andrew Slaughter MP in objection to the application.

 

In the course of discussions, Councillor Wesley Harcourt proposed the amendment, that should the application be approved, the construction and logistics plan for the application should come back to the committee for oversight and approval. This was seconded by Councillor Asif Siddique.

 

The Committee voted on the proposed amendment for application 2019/00915/FUL as follows:

 

For:

8

Against:

0

Not Voting:

0

 

 

The Committee voted on the recommendations for application 2019/00915/FULas follows:

 

 

Officer Recommendation 1

 

For:

6

Against:

2

Not Voting:

0

 

 

Officer Recommendation 2

 

For:

7

Against:

0

Not Voting:

1

            RESOLVED THAT:

 

Planning Application 2019/00915/FUL be approved, subject to:

 

1.     Subject to there being no contrary direction from the Mayor for London that

the Chief Planning Officer be authorised to grant planning permission upon the

completion of a satisfactory legal agreement and subject to the conditions listed

below.

 

 

2.     That the Chief Planning Officer after consultation with the Head of Law and the

Chair of the Planning and Development Control Committee be authorised to

make any minor changes to the proposed Heads of Terms of the legal agreement

or conditions, which may include the variation, addition or deletion of conditions,

any such changes shall be within their discretion.

 

 

 

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

 

Cllr Harcourt declared a non-pecuniary interest in respect of Bishop’s Park Tennis Court (2020/01261/FUL), as he was the Cabinet Member responsible for the Environment. He confirmed he would leave the meeting for the item and not vote on the application.

 

Cllr Karmel declared a non-pecuniary interest in respect of Bishop’s Park Tennis Court (2020/01261/FUL), as his daughter had received coaching there and the school she attends uses the facilities. As he considered this would not prejudice his vote, he remained in the meeting and voted on the item.

 

Councillor Matt Uberoi declared a non-pecuniary interest in respect of Bishop’s Park Tennis Court (2020/01261/FUL), as he knew one of the objectors. As he had not discussed the application with them, he considered this would not prejudice his vote, he remained in the meeting and voted on the item.

 

The Committee heard a representation from a resident in objection to the application on behalf of residents of Bishops Mansions.

 

The Committee heard representations from the Applicant and a resident in support of the application.

 

In the course of discussions, Councillor Matt Thorley proposed three amendments as follows:

 

1.     That a new noise impact assessment be conducted, with the remit to be agreed with officers beforehand.

2.     That temporary use be granted for one year and

3.     That the hours of operation of the application match those of the existing tennis courts.

 

This was seconded by Councillor Alex Karmel.

 

The Committee voted on the proposed amendments for application 2020/01261/FUL as follows:

 

 

Amendment 1

 

For:

2

Against:

5

Not Voting:

0

 

Amendment 2

 

For:

2

Against:

5

Not Voting:

0

 

Amendment 3

 

For:

2

Against:

5

Not Voting:

0

 

The proposed amendments were refused.

 

The Committee voted on the recommendation for application 2020/01261/FULas follows:

 

 

Officer Recommendation 1

 

For:

5

Against:

2

Not Voting:

0

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

            RESOLVED THAT:

 

Planning Application 2020/01261 be refused, subject to:

 

1.     That the application be refused for the following reason(s):

 

 

1) The proposal is considered unacceptable on the grounds of visual amenity. More particularly, the addition of enclosures to the padel court perimeter fence by virtue of their design, scale, obscure materials with advertisement signage introduce adiscordant feature which has an adverse impact on the visual permeability of this open space (Metropolitan Open Land) and would fail to preserve or enhance the Bishops Park Conservation Area. In this respect, the proposal is contrary to Policies DC1, DC8, OS1, OS2, RTC3, of the Local Plan (2018) and Key Principles AH1, AH2 and CAG3 of the Planning Guidance Supplementary Planning Document (2018).

 

2) The proposal is unacceptable on the grounds of residential amenity. The

application site is in close proximity to nearby residential properties at Bishops

Mansions in Bishop Park Road and it is considered that the existing use has a

harmful impact in terms of nuisance, noise and disturbance. The Noise Impact

Assessment does not not include sufficient information to draw robust conclusions

regarding the regular use of the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

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

 

The Committee heard a representation from the Applicant in support of the application.

 

The Committee voted on the recommendations for application 2020/00795/FULas follows:

 

Officer Recommendation 1

 

For:

8

Against:

0

Not Voting:

0

 

 

 

Officer Recommendation 2

 

For:

8

Against:

0

Not Voting:

0

 

 

            RESOLVED THAT:

 

Planning Application 2020/00795/FULbe approved, subject to:

 

1.     That the Committee resolve that the Chief Planning Officer be authorised to grant planning permission upon the completion of a satisfactory legal agreement and subject to the conditions listed below;

 

 

2.     To authorise that the Chief Planning Officer after consultation with the Head

of Law and the Chair of the Planning and Development Control Committee be

authorised to make any minor changes to the proposed Heads of Terms of the

legal agreement or conditions, which may include the variation, addition or

deletion of conditions, any such changes shall be within their discretion.

 

 

 

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

 

The Committee voted on the recommendations for application 2020/00153/ADV as follows:

 

 

Officer Recommendation 1

 

For:

7

Against:

0

Not Voting:

1

 

Officer Recommendation 2

 

For:

8

Against:

0

Not Voting:

0

 

 

            RESOLVED THAT:

 

Planning Application 2020/00153/ADVbe approved, subject to:

 

1.     That the Chief Planning Officer be authorised to grant advertisement consent subject to the conditions below:

 

 

2.     That the Chief Planning Officer after consultation with the Head of Law and the Chair of the Planning and Development Control Committee be authorised to make any minor changes to the conditions, which may include the variation, addition or deletion of conditions, any such changes shall be within their discretion.