Agenda item

5i.        160-164 Hurlingham Road, London SW6 3NG, Parsons Green and Walham

 

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

 

The Committee heard representations in objection to the application from three local residents. Some of the points raised included: The bulk and height of the proposal would be detrimental to the visual amenity of local residents. The proposal would significantly increase footfall, noise, and disturbance. The suggestion in the report that the proposal would bring an additional 300 jobs to the local area (based on square footage) was inaccurate. Residents had calculated that more than 1,000 people would use the site. The proposal offered a vast amount of office space which was excessive for the local area. It would add to parking stress locally and increased congestion from commuters and deliveries to the site. The proposal was in a conservation area and the vistas in and out of the area were significant. If the proposal were approved, it would be detrimental to the current views.

 

The Committee heard representations against the application from Councillor Mark Loveday, Ward Councillor for Parsons Green and Walham.

 

During the course of discussions, the Committee explored a number of issues including the existing traffic conditions and adverse impact the proposal would have. The number of deliveries which were anticipated to the site. Further topics included the height and massing of the proposal and it not being in keeping with other  two storey applications, the discordant design, street trees and its residential setting.  

 

The Committee voted on application 2018/01638/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:

3

Against:

5

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:

6

Against:

2

Not Voting:

0

 

            RESOLVED THAT:

 

Planning Application 2018/01638/FUL be refused for the following reasons:

·           The adverse traffic impact of the proposal.

·           The height and bulk of the proposal.

·         The impact of the proposal on the conservation area.

·         That the proposal was an over intensification of the use of the site.

·         The proposed use will increase footfall which will be to the detrimental to the residential amenity of local residents.

 

 

198 North End Road, London W14 9NX, North End

 

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: As well as the extraction duct, the applicant had installed two fans which had not been disclosed on the original application. The proposal would cause noise and nuisance and effect the residential amenity of close neighbours. The combination of the duct and fans ensured the proposal exceeded the background noise levels. Local residents had commissioned an independent noise survey to demonstrate the adverse impact of the proposal.

 

The Committee heard a representation in support of the application from the agent. Some of the points raised included: The noise levels created by the changes had been checked by the Council and were compliant. The noise from the premises was lower than the noise created by a nearby Chinese restaurant. There was no adverse environmental impact from the proposal.  The duct would be painted grey to blend in with surrounding extraction systems.  The applicant proposed that the duct could be moved back so that it would be flush against the premises wall. The duct had been test by the Council’s Noise and Nuisance officer and there was no vibration, causing additional noise from the unit.

 

The Committee heard representations against the application from Councillor Zarar Qayyum, Ward Councillor for North End.

 

During the course of discussions, the Committee explored a number of issues including the noise testing conducted by the Council and that the independent noise survey had not been provided to the Authority. Other points included: whether officers were satisfied the proposal in front of committee was sufficiently broad enough to cover the two fans and the duct and whether there was a local micro climate affecting noise levels.

 

The Committee voted on application 2018/01698/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:

7

Against:

1

Not Voting:

0

 

RESOLVED THAT:

 

Planning Application 2018/01698/FUL be approved for the reasons set out in the report and addendum.

 

 

 

Watermeadow Court, Watermeadow Lane, London, Sands End

 

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

 

The Committee voted on application 2017/01841/FUL 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:

5

Against:

2

Not Voting:

1

 

RESOLVED THAT:

 

Planning Application 2017/01841/FUL be approved for the reasons set out in the report and addendum.