Agenda item

Demolition and replacement of front and rear facades (including roofing) and additions to the roof, to include a one-storey extension fronting Essex Road, and two-storey extension fronting Asteys Row (with glass box above) to accommodate 5x1 no.1 BR unit (2 person), 2x no. 2 BR units (3 person), 1xno.2BR units (4 person), x 1 no. 3 BR (5 person unit) residential units: refurbishment of existing ground and first floor and creation of part basement level Class B1 office space (115 sq. metres) and retention of ground floor (150 sq.m.) Class A1 retail unit fronting Essex Road

(Planning application number: PL2018/4159/FUL)

In the discussion the following points were made:

• The Planning Officer reminded the meeting that item was deferred after consideration by the committee at its meeting on 7^th November 2019 for a number of reasons. The reasons include the retail frontage and quantum issues; sustainability credentials of the proposal; sunlight/daylight impacts and issues of overlooking, loss of outlook and dominance.
  
  
• Members were advised that further information had been submitted by the applicant to address the above concerns, for example amendments had been made specifically to the 3^rd floor. Amended plans have included a revised proposed north elevation and applicant has provided a sunlight and daylight analysis.
  
  
• The Planning Officer informed the meeting that the amendments in the revised application would reduce the sense of enclosure and outlook loss concerns raised by the neighbour. Meeting was informed that although officers acknowledge outlook is affected, it is not considered materially harmful and a reason to refuse planning permission.
  
  
• With regard to the loss of retail space which would have to be considered in against the retail function of the Angel Town Centre, the meeting was advised that the revised proposal now results in the retention of a further 50sq.m A1 space ensuring that a total of 1500sq.m A1 space is retained at ground floor within the development.
  
  
• On the sustainability concerns raised at the previous committee meeting, the Planning Officer advised that the applicant had submitted a Technical Note which seeks to ensure that measures regarding the existing retail & office refurbishment, residential unit services, ventilation, overheating, rainwater and lighting were compliant.
  
  
• In addition Members were advised that the sustainability measures now being proposed are now considered acceptable with a condition proposed which ensures that there will be a 19% reduction in regulated CO2 emissions of at least 25% in comparison with regulated emissions from a building which complies with Building Regulation.
  
  
• A resident neighbour was concerned that concerns regarding access in the existing Astey’s Row still remain; the revised plans had minimal changes and would still have a visual impact on the Conservation Area. Other issues raised by the objector was the applicant unwillingness to consider other options in addressing the loss of both daylight and sunlight. Meeting was also advised that her views and concerns had not taken been taken into consideration since item was deferred.
  
  
• In response to the objectors concern, the agent informed the meeting that following the meeting in November 2019, amendments had been made to the scheme to reduce the impact of neighbouring amenity; the sense of enclosure, loss of outlook. The meeting was informed that issues that affected the amenity of neighbours have been sufficiently addressed.
  
  
• On the loss of retail space, the agent informed the meeting that in working with planning officers, it is the view that the loss of the rear and side part of the retail area would not be harmful to the character of the Town Centre.
  
  
• Members welcomed the scheme as acceptable as it provides a mixed use scheme of high quality, retaining retail space within the Angel Town Centre. Members noted the proposed cut back of the 4^th floor extension further which mitigates harm by way of outlook, enclosure and a loss of daylight and sunlight to the neighbouring windows. 

Councillor Picknell proposed a motion to grant planning permission. This was seconded by Councillor Mackmurdie and carried.

RESOLVED:

That following consideration of the case officer’s report (the assessment and recommendations therein), the presentation to Committee, submitted representations and objections provided verbally at this meeting, planning permission be granted subject to the conditions and informatives set out in Appendix 1 of the officer report and subject to the prior completion of a Deed of Planning Obligation made under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 securing the heads of terms as set out in Appendix 1 of the officer report.