You are here: Agenda and minutes

Agenda and minutes

Venue: The link to the full Zoom meeting is below. If you prefer to join the meeting by phone please dial 0208 080 6591 and enter meeting ID : 975 8944 9112 and password 023210 when prompted.

Contact: Ola Adeoye 

Link: Join the meeting via this link

Items
No. Item

155.

Guidance for Members of the Public participating in an Islington Council Virtual Meeting Using Zoom pdf icon PDF 123 KB

Minutes:

The Chair outlined guidance for the virtual meeting for the Committee, officers and the Public

156.

Introductions

Minutes:

Councillor Klute welcomed everyone to the meeting. Members of the Committee and officers introduced themselves and the Chair outlined the procedures for the meeting.

157.

Apologies for Absence

Minutes:

Apologies were received from Councillors Graham, Woolf and Spall

158.

Declarations of Substitute Members

Minutes:

There were no declarations of substitute members

159.

Declarations of Interest

If you have a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest* in an item of business:

§  if it is not yet on the council’s register, you must declare both the existence and details of it at the start of the meeting or when it becomes apparent;

§  you may choose to declare a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest that is already in the register in the interests of openness and transparency. 

In both the above cases, you must leave the room without participating in discussion of the item.

 

If you have a personal interest in an item of business and you intend to speak or vote on the item you must declare both the existence and details of it at the start of the meeting or when it becomes apparent but you may participate in the discussion and vote on the item.

 

*(a)  Employment, etc - Any employment, office, trade, profession or vocation carried on for profit or gain.

(b)    Sponsorship - Any payment or other financial benefit in respect of  your expenses in carrying out duties as a member, or of your election; including from a trade union.

(c)    Contracts - Any current contract for goods, services or works,    between you or your partner (or a body in which one of you has a beneficial interest) and the council.

(d)     Land - Any beneficial interest in land which is within the council’s area.

(e)     Licences- Any licence to occupy land in the council’s area for a month or longer.

(f)      Corporate tenancies - Any tenancy between the council and a body in which you or your partner have a beneficial interest.

 (g)    Securities - Any beneficial interest in securities of a body which has a place of business or land in the council’s area, if the total nominal value of the securities exceeds £25,000 or one hundredth of the total issued share capital of that body or of any one class of its issued share capital. 

 

This applies to all members present at the meeting.

 

Minutes:

There were no declarations of interest

160.

Order of Business pdf icon PDF 55 KB

Minutes:

The order of business would be as per the agenda

161.

Minutes of Previous Meeting pdf icon PDF 91 KB

Minutes:

 

RESOLVED:

That the minutes of the meeting held on 2 March 2020 be confirmed as an accurate record of proceedings and the Chair be authorised to sign them.

162.

158-160, Pentoville Road, London, N1 9LJ pdf icon PDF 11 MB

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Demolition of existing single storey building and erection of part one, part 4 storey plus basement office (Use Class B1(a)) with associated works (Departure from Development Plan). Reconsultation on planning application due to a revised description of development and submission of revised drawings and supporting documentation

 

 

(Planning application number: P2019/2290/FUL)

 

In the discussion the following points were made:

  • The Planning Officer informed the meeting that no additional updates had been received since the publication of the agenda.

  • Members were advised that in terms of Local Plan, the Planning Officer advised that the site is within the Kings Cross and Pentonville Road Key Area, the Central Activities Zone (CAZ), Northdown Street Employment Growth Area and the Cross Rail 2 Safeguarding Area.

  • On the issue of Land Use, meeting was informed that site had been vacated by an educational operator teaching make-up and beauty application before 2007 and subsequently occupied by a beauty company which vacated the premises in 2017. Members were advised that the site had not been in use recently as a social infrastructure.

  • The Planning Officer acknowledged that the existing structures are not appropriate for social infrastructure uses although it had been previously used for this purpose for a short period. Members were informed that the loss of an educational facility is contrary to policy, exceptional circumstances make it acceptable to depart from the policy.

  • The Planning Officer informed the meeting that the proposal provides 1,196sqm (GIA) of B1(a) use (office) floorspace, Affordable workspace unit at 5% GIA which is to be leased to the Council, to be secured via a planning obligation within S106 Legal Agreement.

  • Members were advised that following consultation responses received from Design and Conservation officers, the scheme is now considered to be in accordance with Policy 7.6 of the London Plan Policies and the aims and objectives of Development Management policies DM2.1 and DM2.3, following a number of revisions carried out by the applicant which are highlighted in the report.

  • With regards to housing provision, the Planning Officer informed members that a financial contribution of £159,467 has been secured by legal obligations for the provision of off site housing.

  • Member welcomed the proposals especially as the premises had not been in use for an educational function for some time. The proposal is not considered to give rise to unacceptable impacts upon neighbouring residential amenity

 

Councillor Klute proposed a motion to grant Planning Permission. This was seconded by Councillor Kay and carried unanimously

 

 

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.

 

163.

22-23 Tileyard Road & Part of 226-228 York Road Road, London N7 pdf icon PDF 11 MB

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Demolition of existing buildings and structures and erection of a part 3- and part 5-storey (plus basement) building to create Class B1(c) (light-industrial), Class B1 (office) and A3 (ancillary café) floorspace; service yard; cycle parking; plant refuse / recycling facilities; and associated works

 

(Planning application number: P2019/3300/FUL)

 

Councillor Picknell left the meeting during consideration of this item and therefore did not take part in the discussion or vote on this item

 

In the discussion the following points were made:

  • Planning Officer advised meeting that site is within the Vale Royal Brewery Road Locally Significant Industrial Site (LSIS) and not affected by any formal heritage constraints. In addition, Members were informed that although several buildings within the site are attractive Victorian warehouse style buildings, there are no immediate adjacent designated heritage assets or conservation areas. 

  • Members were reminded that an earlier application at the site, and covering an adjoining site was refused planning permission on grounds of land use,  neighbouring amenity, design, sustainability and the absence of an appropriate Section 106 legal agreement.

  • The meeting was informed of applicants subsequent appeal to the Planning Inspectorate which was dismissed on grounds of design and neighbouring amenity.

  • The Planning Officer noted that applicant had endeavoured to address the reasons the appeal was dismissed.

  • In response to a question the Planning officer outlined the landscaping proposals, and that it would be implemented prior to occupation of the building.

  • The Planning Officer acknowledged that the proposal will not involve the net loss of industrial floor space which is in accordance with Part B of Policy DM5.3.

  • A Member welcomed the proposals following long negotiations between planning officers and applicant especially with the use of the Tileyard site by providing space for the music/entertainment sector.

  • The Planning Officer informed the meeting that issues with the design and style of the development and loss of light concerns had been addressed.

  • It was further stated that the floor plans encouraged a hybrid style of lettings which is to be welcomed as it encourages flexible use.

 

 

Councillor Klute proposed a motion to grant Planning Permission. This was seconded by Councillor Kay and carried unanimously

 

 

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.

 

164.

5-10 Brandon Road, N7 9AA pdf icon PDF 8 MB

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Demolition of existing building and structures and erection of a 5-storey building (with part basement) to provide a minimum of 3,726m2 of Use Class B1(c) / B8 floorspace and a maximum of 6,902m2 flexible Use Class B1 floorspace, with service yard, cycle parking, and refuse and recycling facilities.

 

(Planning application number: P2019/3186/FUL)

 

In the discussion the following points were made:

  • The Planning Officer informed the meeting that no additional updates had been received since the publication of the agenda and that application site is located within the Vale Royal/Brewery Road Locally Significant Industrial Site (LSIS).

  • Members were also reminded that an earlier application was refused on grounds of height, design and land use considerations and (in particular lack of floorspace being proposed which is suitable to the Locally Significant Industrial Site(LSIS)).

  • The Planning Officer informed members that the proposal now proposes a scheme that will ensure no net loss of priority floor space and more than the equivalent of 65% of the plot ratio, and is therefore acceptable in land use terms.

  • Members were informed that the proposal had been assessed by the Design Review Panel, and that its suggestions had been included in the scheme by the applicant which  has resulted in a scheme which is of a good standard of desigm.  .

  • A Member welcomed the proposals, that the design is an improvement on the current site and the proposed landscape features and biodiversity measures are now in accordance with planning policy.

  • The Planning Officer acknowledged that the scheme will not result in undue impact on neighbouring residential amenity in terms of daylight/sunlight, privacy or an increased sense of enclosure.

  • Members welcomed the scheme, that it is acceptable especially as it is in accordance with Islington’s Policy as highlighted in the report.

 

 

Councillor Klute proposed a motion to grant Planning Permission. This was seconded by Councillor Kay and carried unanimously.

 

 

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.

 

165.

Hostel & Premises 38-44 Islington Park Street, London N1 1PX pdf icon PDF 5 MB

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Change of use of existing HMO (House of Multiple Occupation) to allow the creation of 7 no. self - contained residential units – 3 no.1bed  flats, 2 no. 3 bed  houses, and 1 no. 5 bed  house. Excavation at lower ground floor level to increase the floor to ceiling heights and enlarge the existing rear light wells. Alterations to the front and rear elevations including installation or metal railings, new access gates, and proposed landscaping, refuse and cycle parking provision and other associated works

 

(Planning application number: P2019/2651/FUL)

 

In the discussion the following points were made:

  • The Planning Officer informed members of the following updates 

Floor plans PL11-PL14 (proposed lower level ground to proposed second level floor plan) in condition 2 of the Committee report need to be amended to Rev. P2. These revisions were submitted during the course of the application to demonstrate a soft spot  in the proposed dwelling where a floor lift could be located had been changed to the installation of a lift and to address inclusive Design Officer comments.

  • In addition, the Planning Officer highlighted changes to the Heads of Terms – Correct recommendation (a) – Requiring the 7 no.units to be for social rented housing including the requirement for the nomination rights for the ‘Move On’ units to return to Islington in accordance with local authority lettings policy should the GLA ‘Move On’ scheme cease to exist.

 

  • The Planning Officer advised the meeting that the site is not within an Employment Growth Area, Employment designated area or within the Central Activities Zone.

  • Members were reminded that the loss of the existing vacant HMO is considered acceptable having consulted the Council’s Environmental Health Team who manage and license HMO’s within the Borough. The team had assessed the existing accommodation as not of good quality.

  • Members were advised that the Council’s Housing Team had not objected to the loss of HMO and welcomes the change of use as the proposal would deliver affordable homes which is one of the Council’s key objectives identified in Part G of Policy CS12 of Islington’s Core Strategy Policies (2011).

  • The Planning Officer acknowledged that excavation works is to be carried out in the basement and is considered acceptable in design terms, and that the proposed works are compliant with the Council’s Basement SPD in regards to its structural impact. The Building Control Officer had reviewed the application and raised no objections to the excavation works from a structural perspective.

  • A member of the public stated that whilst he supported the proposal and had a good relationship with One Housing Group who had been supportive in discussions with him, he did have concerns over the excavation works to the basement, which according to a structural engineers report could cause cracking and problems to his property. He requested for a waiver especially on this issue. (Following questions from the committee the objector clarified that his use of the term ‘waiver’ was intended to mean that he was requesting that the committee  ...  view the full minutes text for item 165.

166.

Redwood Court, 85 Sunnyside London, N19 3SN pdf icon PDF 4 MB

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Proposed rooftop telecommunications upgrade involving; the replacement of existing antennas, dish and cabinet with 6 no. new antennas, 3 no. dishes and 2 replacement equipment cabinets to facilitate 5G coverage.

 

(Planning application number: P2019/1652/FUL (Council Owned Building))

 

In the discussion the following points were made:

  • The Planning Officer informed the meeting that although the site is situated within the Whitehall Park Conservation Area, there are no statutory or locally listed buildings in the vicinity of the site nor is Redwood Court listed, so there is no impact on heritage assets.

  • Members were reminded that issues for consideration with the proposal include the impact of the proposals on the character and appearance of the Conservation Area, public benefits, impact on the amenities of surrounding occupiers and public health implications.

  • With regards to the impact of the proposal on the character and appearance of the conservation area, the Planning Officer highlighted  concerns of the Design and Conservation Team with regards to telecommunications equipment being installed on roof tops. The Team  recognised that considering the host building is not an undesignated heritage asset and is considerably higher than its neighbours it will only have a neutral impact.

  • Members were reminded that installations of any telecommunications is governed by national and international legislation and guidance which requires the need to comply with limitations imposed by the International Commission of Non-Ionising Radiation Protection (ICNIRP).

  • A Member of the public expressed concerns about health risks in connection with 5G masts, especially to children, and that residents had not been informed of the proposals before commencement. A resident requested for public discussion of the dangers of 5G with residents before decisions are taken to erect them on tenants properties prior to applications being approved.

  • A neighbouring resident stated that she had concerns about 5G and the effects of radiation and believed that 4G is perfectly adequate for mobile phone use. In addition, she noted that there is evidence of associated dangers with prolonged use of 5G mast and its technology.

  • The applicant stated that all telecommunication equipment and its  installation operates to international standards and must be in compliance with ICNIRP guidelines. The applicant indicated that the equipment is low sound[k1]  generating, designed to be in full compliance with guidelines and sufficiently separated from nearby residential accommodation to cause any disturbance.

  • In response to public health concerns raised by objectors, the Planning Officer informed the meeting that colleagues in Public Health had considered the proposal and provided guidance that risks to public health is low and that the deployment of 5G does not pose a threat to the health and safety of residents (the public Health commentary on 5G, which was included with the papers was noted by the Committee). In addition members were advised that the electromagnetic radiation emitted by the proposed antennas would comply with ICNIRP Guidelines, and that the proposed installation has the appropriate certification.

  • In response to consultation concerns, the Planning Officer stated that 179 letters of consultation had been sent to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 166.