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 the 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.

In relation to Item B1 - 798-804 Holloway Road, Councillor Rupert Perry and Poyser declared that they had attended a site visit, Councillor Poyser declared that he had objected to the previous scheme but not the current application and that he was a member of the Better Archway Forum. In relation to Item B3 - Hilldrop Community Centre, Councillor Fletcher declared that she was a non-voting member of the Hilldrop Community Centre management committee. These interests would not preclude the members from taking part in the discussion and decision making on these items.

The order of business would be as follows:

B1, B3, B4, B2, B5 and B6. Item B7 had been withdrawn from the agenda.

RESOLVED:

That the minutes of the meetings held on 2 December 2014 and 6 January 2015 be confirmed as an accurate record of proceedings and the Chair be authorised to sign them.

Demolition of existing buildings and redevelopment of the site to provide a part three, part four storey mixed use building comprising 345sqm A1 retail floorspace at ground floor and no.9 (C3) residential units at first second and third floors (4 x 1 beds, 4 x 2 beds, 1 x 3 bed), with associated amenity space and cycle storage.

(Planning application number: P2014/3815/FUL)

In the discussion, the following points were made:

·         The planning officer stated that the applicant was TPS Brighton Developments Ltd and not TBS Brighton Developments Ltd as stated in the report.

·         The planning officer stated that Condition 15 should be amended to state that the proposed work was to be undertaken according to the Delivery and Servicing Plan.

·         Solar panels were covered by Development Management Policy DM2.1.

·         No social housing would be provided due to the small size of the site.

·         The applicant confirmed he was willing for the development to only be serviced from Holloway Road.

·         Concern was raised about the impact of the development on the rooflight of 2 Giesbach Road and the loss of amenity.

·         A resident raised concern about overlooking of his roof terrace. The planning officer stated that there would be no overlooking or loss of privacy from the third floor and that the first and second floors were not considered to have a detrimental impact on privacy.

Councillor Poyser proposed a motion to refuse planning permission due to the loss of amenity to 2 Giesbach Road. This was seconded by Councillor Gantly and carried.

RESOLVED:

That planning permission be refused for the reason outlined above, the wording of which was delegated to officers.

Construction of a roof extension to provide an additional floor of B1 (a) office space and plant area with associated air conditioning equipment.  Replacement of existing windows with double glazed timber sash windows and new entrance at ground floor.

(Planning application number: P2014/4545/FUL)

RESOLVED:

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

Conversion of part of existing residential car park to a community food growing garden.

(Planning application number: P2014/2629/FUL)

In the discussion the following points were made:

·         The planning officer confirmed that there would be a yellow painted box adjacent to the site boundary to allow vehicles to manoeuvre. A 2.2 metre pathway would be retained around the perimeter of the garden. This would retain access to those residents who abutted the site and allow for manoeuvring.

·         An objector raised concern about who would manage the garden.

RESOLVED:

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

Construction of a roof extension to form additional accommodation to existing flat, along with increasing height of existing rear flue and chimney stack.

(Planning application number: P2014/3033/FUL)

In the discussion the following points were made:

·         The planning officer confirmed that the applicant had appealed against non-determination. The Sub-Committee was therefore asked to confirm what decision it would have made if it had been determining the application.

·         The proposed roof extension was the same as that at 269 Caledonian Road.

·         The roof extension would not be visible from the street.

RESOLVED:

That planning permission would have been granted subject to the conditions and informative in the case officer’s report, had the Sub-Committee been in a position to determine the application.

The replacement of single glazed crittal windows with double glazed aluminium windows.

(Planning application number: P2014/4131/FUL)

RESOLVED:

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

The installation of vertical bar steel boundary fencing to the Holloway Road, Biddestone Road and Pollard Close elevations and including new gates to the Holloway Road and Biddestone Road elevations, together with tree planting and landscaping.

(Planning application number: P2014/1474/FUL)

In the discussion the following points were made:

·         Residents had been consulted.

·         The proposal included the replacement of the wall with fencing to make the park more inviting, increase visibility through the park and increase usage of the park.

RESOLVED:

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

Erection of replacement roof extension, single storey side extension at first floor level, erection of an access stair enclosure and proposed roof terrace.

(Planning application number: P2015/0178/FUL)

RESOLVED:

That it be noted that this item had been withdrawn from the agenda.

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

MINUTE 51

798-804 HOLLOWAY ROAD, LONDON, N19 3JH

Reason for refusal: The proposed redevelopment of the site to provide a part three, part four storey building would have an unacceptably harmful impact on the amenities of neighbouring property No. 2 Giesbach Road. As a result of the scale, bulk and height of the proposed development in close proximity to the south west facing rooflight at No. 2 Giesbach Road, the proposal would result in an undue sense of enclosure for the present and future occupiers. The proposal is considered to fail to comply with the objectives of policy DM2.1 of the Islington Development Management Policies 2013.