Agenda and minutes

Councillor Picknell welcomed everyone to the meeting. Members of the Committee and officers introduced themselves.

There were no apologies for absence.

There were no declarations of substitute members.

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.

Councillors Mackmurdie declared a personal interest in item B1-1 Berry Place and Councillor Convery declared a personal interest in B2-10 Kiver Road.

Both Councillors Mackmurdie and Convery were not involved in the deliberation and  decision making of the applications which they had declared their personal interests having left the meeting room.

The order of business would be B3,B1,B4 and B2.

RESOLVED:

That the minutes of the meeting held on 9 April 2019 be confirmed as an accurate record of proceedings and the Chair be authorised to sign them.

Installation of plant equipment (9 no. units) above existing flat roof at second floor level (first floor roof) including associated screening enclosures and other works.
(Planning application number: P2018/4155/FUL)

In the discussion the following points were made:

·         Planning Officer informed the meeting that the description under image 3 on page 9 which reads the following wording -‘which has now been removed following  enforcement investigation’ be deleted as it is incorrect.

·         Members were reminded that the application was due to an enforcement action following the unauthorised installation of air conditioning equipment to the main roof, however this has now been removed. The Planning Officer advised that the plant equipment at second floor remains in situ, as the applicant had submitted an appeal.

·         Members were advised that the position of the proposed air conditioning units above the flat roof of the two storey building is acceptable as the units are set in from the south and east elevations which ensures that any views from the public realm is largely obscured with the only views possible from the public realm to the west.

·         An objector was concerned about one air conditioning unit operating 24 hours a day, 7 days a week and regarded the mitigation proposal as insufficient to address the noise levels especially as it had not been tested. The objector queried the hours of operation of the other 8 air conditioning units as proposed by the applicant, requesting that the times to reflect what was stipulated in the previous application of 8.00am to 8.00pm instead of the 6.30am to 8.00pm be restored.

·         Members proposed to revise condition 8 to allow the use of a timer to control the operation of the 7 air source heat pumps and 1 air conditioning unit between the hours of 08.am and 20.00pm Monday to Fridays only.

·         Objector was concerned with the inaccurate noise report submitted by the applicant and the measurement of background sounds as not a fair reflection of the current situation and the construction work in the surrounding area. There was also concern about the air conditioning units be in operation over the weekend when the office is closed.

·         In response to noise concerns and its impact on the amenity of neighbouring residents, the agent informed members that only 1 out of the 9 air conditioning units would be in operation for 24hours and although placed in an acoustic enclosure, the units will be emitting 5 decibels lesser than the required noise levels.

·         On the issue for the need of air conditioning units being used for 24 hours, the agent advised that the parent company is based in Australia hence the need to have skeletal staff to manage the London office and its servers.

·         Members enquired about the proposed operating hours for of the units and in particular on the weekend.

·         Councillor Clarke proposed a motion that the operating hours be amended to read from 8.00am to 8.00pm, Monday to Friday. Councillor Graham seconded the motion and it was carried.

·         With regards  ...  view the full minutes text for item 69.

Erection of mansard roof extension with 2no. dormers to the front and rear elevations. Erection of a single storey rear ground floor extension with a glazed roof and associated alterations.

(Planning application number: P2019/1016/FUL)

In the discussion the following points were made:

·         The Planning Officer advised the meeting that item is before Committee as the applicant is a ward councillor. Members were advised that no objections had been received.

·         The Planning Officer advised that the proposed extension remains subordinate to and preserves the scale and integrity of the original building. Members were advised that the extension is of an acceptable scale and appearance and not visible from the public realm.
 

·         The meeting was advised that the proposal is not considered to prejudice the residential amenity of neighbouring amenity and not contrary to policy DM2.1 of the Islington Development Management Polices June 2013.

·         With regards to subsidence concerns raised by neighbours, the meeting was advised that party wall issues are a civil matter and are not a material planning consideration.

·         In response to concerns that the proposal will be setting a precedent, the Planning Officer advised that with regard to rooflines outside conservation areas, paragraph 5.153 of the Islington Urban Design Guide 2017 states that there is more scope to introduce roof extensions where it is high quality design.

RESOLVED:

That following consideration of the case officer’s report (the assessment and recommendations therein), the presentation to Committee, submitted representations at this meeting, planning permission be granted subject to the conditions and set out in Appendix 1 of the officer report.

Erection of an additional storey above the existing roof level to allow additional B1 office floorspace, and associated alterations.

(Planning application number: P2018/2849/FUL)

In the discussion the following points were made:

·         The Planning Officer advised members that no additional updates had been received since the publication of the agenda.

·         The meeting was informed that results from the submitted daylight assessment indicate that where losses did occur it was acceptable and within the BRE Guidelines. Members were informed that it was noticeable that windows located in proximity to the application site such as No.27 and No.28 Myddelton Street would not be unreasonably impacted beyond its existing situation.

·         An objector was concerned that the proposal would impact the amenity of  neighbouring properties; overlooking concerns with regards to the communal gardens and their loss of privacy; daylight sunlight loss and the historical impact on the character of the property and surrounds.

·         In response to objectors concerns about loss of privacy, the agent advised that condition 10 provides details of the visual privacy screening which will be submitted for approval and prior to it being used and condition 11 will restrict the hours of operation of the roof terrace.

·         Members welcomed the design and importantly applicant’s decision to use similar brickwork to match the existing appearance of the building, however concerns were raised about the purpose of the roof terrace despite the proposed hours of operation as noted in condition 11. Members acknowledged the sunlight and daylight loss concerns but regarded it as not significant to affect neighbouring amenity.

·         Members were concerned with the roof terrace and its use by office employees and the difficulty of monitoring and enforcing its use. Members noted the screening details, however suggested that notwithstanding a new condition be included stating that both the roof terrace and flat roof areas at rear first and second floor level cannot be used as roof terraces or sitting out spaces other than for essential maintenance or repair, or escape in case of emergency.

·           Members agreed suggested condition 10 (details of screening) and Condition 11 (hours of use/operation for the terrace) should be deleted.

·         Councillor Convery proposed a motion to include a condition which restricts the use of both the roof terrace and the flat roof as amenity space. This was seconded by Councillor Mackmurdie and carried.

ADDITIONAL CONDITION RESTRICTING USE OF REAR FLAT ROOF AREAS: Notwithstanding the hereby approved plans including drawing numbers 17.235.102 Existing and Proposed 1st Floor Plan, 17.235.103 Existing and Proposed 2nd Floor Plan & 17.235.104 Existing and Proposed Roof Plan no permission is granted for any use of the rear flat roof areas at first and second floor levels as any form of amenity or sitting out space of any kind whatsoever and shall not be used other than for essential maintenance or repair, or escape in case of emergency. 

REASON: To prevent the undue overlooking, loss of privacy and noise and disturbances to adjoining residential properties.

RESOLVED:

That following consideration of the case officer’s report (the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 71.

Retrospective application to change the use of the property from a single dwelling house (C3 use) to be retained as a mixed use; comprising of residential (C3) & childcare(D1) uses for a temporary period of 2 years.

(Planning application number: P2019/0223/FUL)

In the discussion the following points were made:

·         Planning officer informed the meeting that condition 3 of the report relating to hours of operation should read 07.30 to 18.00 hours and not 09.00 to 18.00 hours.

·         The Planning Officer advised members that the application had been submitted as a result of an enforcement investigation following a compliant raised about the unauthorised use of the property. Members were reminded that the existing childcare facilities had been operational since August 2009 and its present use would be immune from enforcement action in the event of it still being operational by August 2019.

·         Members were informed that although the loss of the existing residential floor space would not be acceptable in land use terms, the introduction of a child care facility and loss of the pre-existing residential use is considered on balance to be acceptable

·         The Planning Officer informed members that the proposal will allow the applicant seek alternative locations for the childcare facilities, after which the host property would be reinstated to a single dwelling house.

·         The applicant informed the Committee that she was in the process of looking for alternative locations for the existing child care facility, were hoping to hire a hall and were actually in the process of downsizing the scale of the facility.

·         Members welcomed Ofsted’s high rating, but noted that the provision of child care in this location amounts to a loss of residential floor space which is contrary to the Council policies.

·         A suggestion for an informative be included in the permission stating that the child care facility be limited to a 2-year period after which it will revert back to being a single dwelling was noted. Members agreed that the exact wording of the informative be delegated to the planning officer and the Chair.

·         Officers advised members to correct a typo in condition 3 controlling the hours of use of the nursery to change from the report which stated to begin at 9am and to replace this time with 07.30 am to 18.00pm Monday to Fridays.

·         In response to issues of noise disturbance to neighbouring properties and the use of rear garden, the planning officer informed the meeting that conditions 3 and 4 in the report addresses those concerns.

Councillor Convery proposed a motion to include an informative stating the temporary nature of the permission granted. This was seconded by Councillor Graham and carried.

RESOLVED:

That following consideration of the case officer’s report (the assessment and recommendations therein), the presentation to Committee, submitted representations planning permission be granted subject to the conditions set out in Appendix 1 of the officer report and an informative to be included as stated above, the wording of which is to be delegated to officers and the Chair.

CONDITION  ...  view the full minutes text for item 72.