Agenda and minutes

Councillor Rupert Perry welcomed everyone to the meeting. Members of the Sub-Committee and officers introduced themselves. The Chair explained that the Sub-Committee would deal with the determination of planning applications and outlined the procedures for the meeting.

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.

There were no declarations of interest.

The order of business would be as follows:

B2, B3 and B1.

RESOLVED:

That the minutes of the meeting held on 10 June 2014 be confirmed as an accurate record of proceedings and the Chair be authorised to sign them.

Change of use at basement and ground floor levels from retail use (A1 Use Class) to professional services (A2 Use Class) inclusive of the additional floor space to the rear ground floor extension approved in December 2013 under Ref. P2013/3074.

(Planning application number: P2014/1118/FUL)

The planning officer reported that condition three of the report and the reason for condition three should be amended to remove any reference to estate agents.

In the discussion the following points were made:

·      Although the objections referred to the use of the garden area at the site, this was not part of this application.

RESOLVED:

That planning permission be granted subject to the conditions and informatives in the case officer’s report and amended condition as outlined above.

Replacement of the existing rear basement extension and ground floor terrace with a new basement extension and ground floor 2-storey half width rear extension. Replacement of non-original front basement window with two traditional sash windows and restoration of first floor cast iron balconies. Application for Listed Building Consent for the replacement of the existing rear basement extension and ground floor terrace with a new basement extension and ground floor 2-storeyhalf width rear extension. Alterations to internal walls at basement and ground floor level; replacement of 1950's front basement window with two traditional sash windows and restoration of first floor cast iron balconies.

Planning application number: P2014/1153/LBC

The planning officer reported that condition six of the report had been amended to read “Notwithstanding the plans hereby approved, consent is granted for the steps to the front lightwell area provided they are formed of natural stone slabs to match existing materials, details of which shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the relevant works commencing”.

In the discussion the following points were made:

·      The building was listed so no development was permissible under permitted development rights.

·      The existing original style windows to the rear would be retained.

·      Concern was raised regarding privacy, overlooking and noise nuisance from the rear extension.

·      Although an existing application had been refused on appeal to the Planning Inspectorate but many of the principles of the development had been considered acceptable by the Planning Inspector.

·      Concern was raised about overlooking from a possible use of the new second floor extension as a roof terrace.

·      The applicant would be expected to carry out development considerately and an informative could be added to reinforce acceptable hours of operation during the development.

Councillor Fletcher proposed a motion to add a condition prohibiting the use of the second floor extension as a roof terrace and an informative to specify hours of operation in relation to the works being carried out. This was seconded by Councillor Perry and carried.

RESOLVED:

That planning permission be granted subject to the amended conditions and informatives in the case officer’s report and additional condition and informative as outlined above.

Creation of roof terrace area to rear flat roof at second floor enclosed with railings and timber slats.

(Planning application number: P2014/0307/FUL)

In the discussion the following points were made:

·           There was a Section 52 agreement in place restricting the use of the flat roof as a roof terrace but this did not prevent the grant of planning permission and other material considerations were also relevant.

·           The railing element was just to the rear of the terrace with existing brick elements to the sides.

·           The Committee could not condition hours of use of a terrace but if a statutory noise nuisance was an issue there were remedies for adjoining properties.

·           The height of the brick walls to the side would be slightly higher than 1.2 metres.

·           Concern was raised about historic issues with the development being built not in accordance with the approved plans and it was noted that the Section 52 agreement had been created to mitigate the impacts of this.

·           The two windows immediately next to the terrace area served a landing and staircase but objectors contended that a dormer window in the roof and bedroom window to the rear elevation were also in close proximity to the proposed site.

·           The other roof terraces on the adjoining site were recessed and the noise from those sites was contained.

·           The applicant would be happy to raise the brick elements to the site of the roof area if required.

·           The Section 52 agreement was not the issue in this instance but the impact on adjoining residential amenity.

Councillor Fletcher, seconded by Councillor Poyser, proposed that the application be approved. Councillor Perry, seconded by Councillor Gantly, proposed that the application be refused. The Chair, Councillor Perry exercised his casting vote as the votes had been cast equally.

RESOLVED:

That planning permission be refused on the grounds of impact on residential amenity due to the proximity of the neighbouring property’s windows (including the dormer to the roof) and noise impacts from the proposed terrace. The exact wording for the reasons for refusal be delegated to officers.

Flat 8, 523, Caledonian Road, London, N7 9RH (Item B9)

REASON FOR REFUSAL

The proposed roof terrace would result in a detrimental material impact on the amenity of the neighbouring residents at number 525, by reason of noise and overlooking from the neighbouring windows (particularly the dormer window at 525 due to its close proximity), and as such would be contrary to policy DM2.1 of the Islington Development Management policies 2013.