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.

Councillors Klute and Makarau Schwartz attended as 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:

B1, B4, B5, B3, B7, B8, B2 and B6.

RESOLVED:

That the minutes of the meeting held on 1 April 2014 be confirmed as an accurate record of proceedings and the Chair be authorised to sign them.

Two storey side extension, single storey rear extension and creation of basement extension with front lightwells and rear basement level courtyard.

(Planning application number: P2014/0741/FUL)

In the discussion the following points were made:

·         The Urban Design Guide which gave guidance on basement excavations was adopted in 2006.

·         Concern was raised about hours of operation not being specified in relation to the works being carried out.

Councillor Klute proposed a motion to add 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 conditions and informatives in the case officer’s report and additional informative as outlined above.

Variation of condition 7 (plan numbers) and removal of condition 6 (window recess) of application P112675 dated 19/3/2012, for changes to the external appearance of the building.

(Planning application number: P2014/0595/S73)

In the discussion the following points were made:

·        The applicant had requested longer than 6 months to complete the works.

·        Officers considered that 6 months was proportionate to the extent of works and had received no information about why the applicant wanted an extension.

·        If the applicant was given 6 months and could not meet this, a new application for the variation of the time limit condition could be submitted. With the submission of a variation of condition application, the applicant was advised that more information should be submitted with regards to the reasons why the deadline could not be met and a time plan for the completion of the works should be submitted.

RESOLVED:

That planning permission be granted subject to the conditions and informatives in the case officer’s report.

Part demolition of existing garden level extension. Construction of a single storey basement rear extension and a bathroom rear extension between ground and first floors. Conversion of the vault area under the front steps to bathroom.

(Planning application numbers: P2014/0530/FUL and P2014/0574/LBC)

In the discussion the following points were made:

·         It would be possible to add an informative to specify the hours of operation.

·         Concern was expressed about the design of the proposal as well as its bulk.

Councillor Klute proposed a motion to refuse planning permission on the grounds that the bulk and design failed to preserve and enhance the look of the property. This was seconded by Councillor Rupert Perry and carried.

RESOLVED:

That planning permission and listed building consent be refused for the reasons outlined above, the wording of which was delegated to officers.

Erection of roof extension with 3 velux rooflights to front elevation and double glazed doors to rear; formation of a rear roof terrace with wrought iron railings.

(Planning application number: P2014/0677/FUL)

In the discussion the following points were made:

·        Consideration was given to the visibility of the extension from both the public and private realm.

·        Concern was raised that there could be overlooking from the balcony which could create a sense of enclosure.

·        In the terrace of eight houses, there were two houses with roof extensions. Both of these had been granted approval under previous policies.

·        Concern was raised about the design of the rear. A member suggested that a mansard roof could be more appropriate and that it might be possible to move the front rooflights to make them less visible from the public realm.

Councillor Klute proposed a motion to defer consideration of the planning application to enable the rear to be redesigned and the rooflights to be moved to make them less visible from the public realm. This was seconded by Councillor Webbe and carried.

RESOLVED:

That consideration of the planning application be deferred for the reasons set out above.

Erection of roof extension with 3 velux rooflights to front elevation and double glazed doors to rear; formation of a rear roof terrace with wrought iron railings.

(Planning application number: P2014/0676/FUL)

Councillor Klute proposed a motion to defer consideration of the planning application to enable the rear to be redesigned and the rooflights to be moved to make them less visible from the public realm. This was seconded by Councillor Webbe and carried.

Councillor Webbe proposed a motion that a site visit be arranged. This was seconded by Councillor Rupert Perry and carried.

RESOLVED:

That consideration of the planning application be deferred for the reasons set out above and that a site visit be arranged.

Replacement of windows in front elevation with double glazed framed windows and insertion of first floor rear window.

(Planning application number: P2014/0835/FUL)

The planning officer reported that Recommendation A should be deleted as the application was not subject to a memorandum of understanding.

RESOLVED:

That planning permission be granted subject to the conditions and informative in the case officer’s report.

Replacement boundary wall with associated security fencing.

(Planning application number: P2014/1094/FUL)

RESOLVED:

That planning permission be granted subject to the conditions set out in the case officer’s report.

Insertion of new glazed doors in place of existing windows to allow access to new external paved area with new disabled access ramp.

(Planning application number: P2014/0109/FUL)

In the discussion the following points were made:

·        In planning terms use of the outside areas could bot be restricted. The application was for the door and ramp only.

·        Peabody were responsible for managing the area and public protection could measure noise and take action if there was a problem.

Councillor Makarau Schwartz proposed a motion that two informatives be added to request that the residents of Block N be consulted on how to manage the outside space and that a no smoking sign be installed. This was seconded by Councillor Rupert Perry and carried.

RESOLVED:

That planning permission be granted subject to the conditions and informative set out in the case officer’s report plus the additional informatives as outlined above, the wording of which was delegated to officers.

This draft wording has been provided by officers following the meeting and is included here for completeness.

106 Barnsbury Road, London, N1 0ES

The proposed rear extensions, by reason of their size, bulk and excessive depth in relation to the basement extension, would adversely affect the character and special architectural and historic interest of the listed building. The extensions would, as such, cause harm to the significance of the heritage asset, contrary to chapter 12 (conserving and enhancing the historic environment) of the National Planning Policy Framework 2012, policy 7.8 (sustaining and enhancing the significance of heritage assets) of the London Plan 2011, policy CS9 (protecting and enhancing Islington’s built and historic environment) of Islington’s Core Strategy 2011 and policies DM 2.1 (Design) and DM2.3 (heritage) of Islington’s Development Management Policies 2013.

The proposed basement and ground rear extensions would adversely affect the character and special architectural and historic interest of the listed building by reason of their poor and unsympathetic design arising from the part retention of the existing rear extension which results in an overly complicated form.  The works would, as such, cause harm to the significance of the heritage asset, contrary to 12 (conserving and enhancing the historic environment) of the National Planning Policy Framework 2012, policy 7.8 (sustaining and enhancing the significance of heritage assets) of the London Plan 2011, policy CS9 (protecting and enhancing Islington’s built and historic environment) of Islington’s Core Strategy 2011 and policies DM 2.1 (Design) and DM2.3 (heritage) of Islington’s Development Management Policies 2013.

Peabody Community Centre (adjoining block N, 19 Chequer Street), Chequer Street, London, EC1Y 8PN

Additional Informative: The applicant is requested to place a 'no smoking' sign adjacent to the proposed new entrance door, in order to reduce disturbance to the neighbouring occupiers.

Additional Informative: The applicant is advised to liaise with the residents of Block N, with regards to proposals for the use of the external space/courtyard area.