Minutes:
Please see the Addendum attached to the minutes for further details.
Councillor Karmel agreed that the amendment to the wording did accurately reflect the mood of the Committee and reiterated his previous concerns about the harm to the listed building caused by the proposed changes to the Council Chamber.
Councillor Ivimy proposed, seconded by Councillor Connell, that Councillor Karmel’s comments be recorded on the minutes, which the Committee agreed.
The Committee voted on planning application2015/04022/FUL and the Committee unanimously agreed.
RESOLVED THAT:
The following revised wording (in italics and underlined) to the Council's heritage case, as set out in refusal reason 1 of the planning application 2015/04022/FUL, which is based on Counsel's advice, be amended:
‘The development would cause harm to visual amenity; harm to the character, appearance and setting of the listed building (comprising the 1888-1890 original Town Hall fronting Fulham Road, the 1904-1905 Harwood Road wing, and the 1934 extension fronting Fulham Road) and harm to the character and appearance of the Walham Green Conservation Area. The harm caused would not be outweighed by public benefits, which would not result in sustainable development. It has not been demonstrated that the development would represent the optimum viable use of the listed building.
More particularly the design, height and massing of the replacement building behind the retained façade of the 1934 extension and the design of the replacement windows at first, second and third floor levels in the front elevation of the 1934 extension together with the cumulative impact of alterations to the 1888-1890 original Town Hall and 1904-1905 Harwood Road elements of the building would cause harm to the character and appearance of the listed building which it is desirable to preserve in accordance with Section 16(2) and Section 66(1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990.
The design, height and massing of the replacement building behind the retained façade of the 1934 extension would fail to preserve the setting of the retained elements of the listed building which it is desirable to preserve in accordance with s.16(2) and s.66(1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990.
The design, height and massing of the replacement building behind the retained façade of the 1934 building; the design of the replacement windows at first, second and third floor levels in the front elevation of the 1934 building and the unneighbourly and over dominant extension to the Concert Hall (to the rear of the Cedarne Road terrace of Buildings of Merit) would cause harm to the character and appearance of the Walham Green Conservation Area (including views within and into the Conservation Area), which it is desirable to preserve in accordance with s.72 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990.
In these respects the proposal is contrary to paras 131, 132 and 134 of the NPPF; London Plan Policies 7.1, 7.2, 7.4, 7.5, 7.6, 7.8 and 7.9; Policy BE1 of the Core Strategy 2011; DM Local Plan Polices DM G1, DM G3, DM G5 and DM G7 and Planning Guidance SPD Polices 31, 37, 46, 49, 61 and 62.’