Agenda and minutes

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

Apologies were received from Councillor Klute.

Councillor Convery substituted for Councillor Klute.

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 Convery and Woolf declared a personal interest in Item B4, 89-91 Mildmay Park, N1 4NB.

The order of business would be B1, B5,B4,B6,B7,B8,B2 and B3,

Councillor Kay informed the meeting that she would not be participating in the both the consideration and decision regarding item B4 and that Cllr Poyser will chair the item.

RESOLVED:

That the minutes of the meeting held on 21 May 2020 be confirmed as an accurate record of proceedings and the Chair be authorised to sign them.

Proposed erection of infill block side extension over the yard entrance to 11-13 Benwell and 2 storey roof extension to create six new residential units plus associated internal alterations and provision of a new communal entrance, lift core, cycle parking facilities and PV panels.

(Planning application number: P2019/3070/FUL)

In the discussion the following points were made:

·       The Planning Officer informed the meeting that although site is not within a Conservation Area, the rear of the building lies in close proximity to part of the long eastern edge of the St Mary Magdalene Conservation Area.

·       Members were advised that the proposal involves extending and altering the existing building at 15-21 Benwell Road, improving the existing communal residential facilities and increasing the number of residential units by six. The Planning Officer advised that this would require the existing building to be extended by 2 storeys at roof level resulting in an additional height of approximately 6m, consisting of a fourth floor level (2.95m in height) and fifth floor level (3m in height).

·       Members were advised of the infill extension between the application site and 9 Benwell Road to the south which would infill the space for a width of 5m, depth of 14.5m and height of 9.8m, allowing a headroom height of 3,5m below to allow retention to the access yard at 11-13 Benwell Road to the rear of the site.

·       In addition, the scheme proposes improvements to the front appearance, which involves ground floor alterations, the inclusion of a new canopy, glass blocks and metal doors. Internally at ground floor a new part M compliant lift would be provided, bicycle storage space, mobility storage, new dedicated residential entrance and separate refuse and recycling store.

·       Members were advised that in assessing the scheme, officers had taken into consideration the land use policy, accessibility, impact of the scheme on neighbour amenity and the quality of accommodation and residential mix.

·       In terms of design, layout, scale and massing of the proposed development, the Planning Officer advised that the Council’s Design and Conservation Team were consulted and were satisfied that the proposed external alterations would preserve the character and appearance of the host building and the adjacent conservation area.

·       Members were reminded that the site and surrounding area is in context predominantly residential in character, with some commercial uses along Holloway Road and sections of Benwell Road; the Emirate Stadium is located at the north end of the road. 

·       Members were advised that the site comprises a building that is in mixed use with residential units on the upper floors and commercial units on the ground floor.

·       Also Members were advised that although the proposed residential use above the yard entrance of 11-13 Benwell Road is not in conflict with the Site Allocation policies, it is important that the infill development being proposed does not materially affect or prejudice the use of or operation of the adjoining site at 11-13 Benwell Road and any potential redevelopment opportunities in the future.

·       In response to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 32.

Installation of a replacement shopfront with associated fascia, internal security shutter and internal accessibility improvements. Retention of D1 (non-residential institution) use at ground floor and B1 (office) use at upper floor levels

(Planning application number: P2020/1194/FUL)

In the discussion the following points were made:

The discussion of this application was considered in conjunction with Item B3, although votes with regard to its recommendation was taken separately. In the discussion the following points were made:

·         The Planning Officer informed Members that the application site comprises a three storey mid-terrace Victorian property located on the southern side of Seven Sisters Road and that the building is not locally nor statutorily listed, nor is it located within a conservation area.

·         Meeting was advised that the proposed replacement shopfront would represent a positive improvement to the front elevation of the host building, and the proposed replacement signage would not cause harm to the character or appearance of the building or the wider streetscene of Seven Sisters Road.  In addition, members were advised that the proposed internal access improvements would represent a positive improvement.

·         Members were informed that whilst in need of some general repairs and maintenance, the host terrace of which the building forms a part thereof, is of architectural group value as an example of a Victorian retail shopping frontage. The site is located within Nags Head Town Centre (Secondary Retail Frontage) and the Nags Head and Upper Holloway Road Core Strategy Key Area.  Therefore, no concerns are raised with regard to the proposed retention of this use.

·         Members were advised that the proposal seeks to ensure that proposed development responds positively to existing buildings, the streetscape and the wider context, including local architecture and character, surrounding heritage assets, and locally distinctive patterns of development.

·         Meeting was informed that the existing shopfront, the majority of which is recessed, is of timber construction with significant tiled framing, however the proposed replacement timber shopfront would not be recessed from the pavement and would be more traditional in appearance incorporating a stallriser, transoms and mullions, and a fanlight above the entrance. In addition, the shopfront would be set within ceramic tiled cheeks and the existing solid metal roller shutter would also be replaced by a visually permeable ‘shell’ roller shutter, to be installed internally behind the new shopfront.

·         The Planning Officer noted that the replacement shopfront would enhance the character and appearance of the building by re-introducing many of the features common within traditional Victorian shopfronts. The removal of the existing bulky external shutter and installation of the replacement internal ‘shell’ roller shutter is also a welcomed addition. Overall, the proposed shopfront and roller shutter represents a significant improvement to the character and appearance of the host building and the wider streetscene.

·         Meeting was informed that the existing non-illuminated fascia signage would be replaced by a signage of the same height but with a reduced width, so it would be more discreet. The Planning Officer informed members that a condition has been recommended  ...  view the full minutes text for item 33.

Display of 1no. internally illuminated fascia sign with LED matrix panel below, and associated vinyl graphics.

(Planning application number: P2020/1264/ADV)

In the discussion the following points were made:

Installation of a replacement shopfront with associated fascia, internal security shutter and internal accessibility improvements. Retention of D1 (non-residential institution) use at ground floor and B1 (office) use at upper floor levels

(Planning application number: P2020/1194/FUL)

In the discussion the following points were made:

The discussion of this application was considered in conjunction with Item B3, although votes with regard to its recommendation was taken separately. In the discussion the following points were made:

·         The Planning Officer informed Members that the application site comprises a three storey mid-terrace Victorian property located on the southern side of Seven Sisters Road and that the building is not locally nor statutorily listed, nor is it located within a conservation area.

·         Meeting was advised that the proposed replacement shopfront would represent a positive improvement to the front elevation of the host building, and the proposed replacement signage would not cause harm to the character or appearance of the building or the wider streetscene of Seven Sisters Road.  In addition, members were advised that the proposed internal access improvements would represent a positive improvement.

·         Members were informed that whilst in need of some general repairs and maintenance, the host terrace of which the building forms a part thereof, is of architectural group value as an example of a Victorian retail shopping frontage. The site is located within Nags Head Town Centre (Secondary Retail Frontage) and the Nags Head and Upper Holloway Road Core Strategy Key Area.  Therefore, no concerns are raised with regard to the proposed retention of this use.

·         Members were advised that the proposal seeks to ensure that proposed development responds positively to existing buildings, the streetscape and the wider context, including local architecture and character, surrounding heritage assets, and locally distinctive patterns of development.

·         Meeting was informed that the existing shopfront, the majority of which is recessed, is of timber construction with significant tiled framing, however the proposed replacement timber shopfront would not be recessed from the pavement and would be more traditional in appearance incorporating a stallriser, transoms and mullions, and a fanlight above the entrance. In addition, the shopfront would be set within ceramic tiled cheeks and the existing solid metal roller shutter would also be replaced by a visually permeable ‘shell’ roller shutter, to be installed internally behind the new shopfront.

·         The Planning Officer noted that the replacement shopfront would enhance the character and appearance of the building by re-introducing many of the features common within traditional Victorian shopfronts. The removal of the existing bulky external shutter and installation of the replacement internal ‘shell’ roller shutter is also a welcomed addition. Overall, the proposed shopfront and roller shutter represents a significant improvement to the character and appearance of the host building and the wider streetscene.

·         Meeting was informed that the existing non-illuminated fascia signage would be replaced by  ...  view the full minutes text for item 34.

Erection of a part four/part five storey building (following demolition of existing single storey building (165sqm use D1 (clinic)) to allow for the creation of 7x self-contained residential flats (use C3) (3x 1bedroom units and 4x 2bedroom units) and ground floor (154sqm) chiropody/dental clinic (use D1).

(Planning application number: P2020/0937/FUL)

Councillor Kay 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:

·         The Planning Officer advised that site is not listed but is located immediately south of the Newington Conservation Area. The proposal introduces a part four, part five storey building to the site which is in close proximity to the south facing windows of the residential properties in Hathersage Court.

·         The Planning Officer reminded members that in January 2019, planning permission was granted for Hathersage and Beasant Court (ref: P2018/1970/FUL) and a separate application to committee in July 2019 was refused on grounds of inappropriate massing, poor quality design and the impact of the scheme on the character and appearance of the conservation area which the present application seeks to address.

·         With regards to land use consideration, the Planning Officer acknowledged the net loss of 11sqm of D1 floorspace, however the reprovision of high quality D1 floorspace in the scheme measured at 154sqm complies with policy DM 4.12 of the Islington Development Management Policy 2013. Members were reminded that the provision and continued use of the chiropodist and dental surgery is considered as providing both social and economic benefit to the community.

·         Meeting was advised that in terms of design and conservation concerns, the scheme is considered acceptable by the Design Officers. On the issue relating to form, bulk, and size of the new proposal, the Planning Officer acknowledged that it was similar to block K of an extant planning permission of 2018.

·         The Planning Officer noted that concerns regarding the elevations have now been addressed, that with the front elevation, the design is acceptable and with the rear elevation balconies and terraces are to be sited further away from the neighbours.

·          In terms of neighbouring amenity, a daylight sunlight assessment was submitted which indicated that 8 windows closest to the proposed development has transgressions in excess of BRE guidelines, however this correlates with the findings for Block K which has planning permission.

·         A neighbouring resident was concerned with the size of the building as it towers over the neighbouring block of Victorian properties.

·         In response, the agent informed the meeting that following the refusal of its previous application in July 2019, the team contacted planning team and submitted a pre-application proposal, taking on board the concerns raised which has now resulted in a well designed and acceptable mixed use development of high quality which retains sufficient D1 floor space and a new residential floorspace to create 7 new units. In addition, members were reminded that the application would secure the requisite financial contribution towards affordable housing.

·         In  ...  view the full minutes text for item 35.

The construction of two new residential units on the existing flat roof of Moore Court, forming a 4th storey to the existing building, as well as an additional refuse store and associated cycle parking facilities.

(Planning application number: P2019/0031/FUL)

In the discussion the following points were made:

·       The Planning Officer informed the meeting that since the agenda was published a further 4 objections had been received and included concerns about notices not being served by the landlord about the development description, disturbance from refuse vehicles, construction noise and the use of cladding materials.

·       Members were advised that if committee was minded to grant planning permission an additional condition 13 preventing the use of the flat roof area as an amenity space would be required.

·       The Planning Officer informed the meeting that the site currently forms part of the modern residential estate situated between Essex Road and Upper Street in the Angel Town Centre Area and that the proposal to erect a single storey extension on the roof of the block will provide two residential units.

·       Members were advised that the proposal will result in an increase to the height of Moore Court from 10.3m to 12.9m, it will have also have two terrace areas which will face Anderson Square Gardens.

·       The Planning Officer informed the meeting that the application had been assessed on issues such as land use policy, amenity, design and energy and efficiency and its impact on conservation areas.

·       Members were advised that in light of concerns about lack of refuse of storage and issues about capacity, a further condition is proposed regarding its final design to ensure that it is accessible for use by all it’s residents.

·       On the legal position about a revised Certificate B notice not being served on rleaseholders, the Legal Advisor informed the meeting that under the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) Order 2015, Article 13, the applicant has a requirement to give notice to leaseholders and residents if there is any development but not required to re notify a second time if the description of the application changes.

·       In response to a concern that the applicant had not addressed issues raised by the Design Team, the Planning Officer informed the meeting that although the issues were raised with the applicant, they are not expected to submit details.

·       A resident informed the meeting that following an initial meeting of both residents and leaseholders early in the year where there was an overwhelming majority against the scheme, all agreed that the scheme was on the edge in terms of density and height. This comment mirrored those raised by the initial architect involved, requesting that the scheme be refused. In addition, the resident was concerned of how the applicant had taken an advantage while carrying out some general works been able to insert a clause which allowed this proposal to include 2 floors on the roof.

·       Another resident was concerned with the daylight and sunlight assessment submitted by applicant as incomplete as it  ...  view the full minutes text for item 36.

Proposed erection of stables and tack room adjacent to the existing rugby pitch (for a temporary period of 2 years, 6 months), together with permanent internal alterations to the listed 'Specials' office within the mezzanine floor of the west wing of Armoury House.

(Planning application number: P2019/2369/FUL)

Discussion with this application was considered in conjunction with Item B7, although votes with regard to its recommendation was taken separately. In the discussion the following points were made:

·       The application site relates to the Grade II* Listed Armoury House (Finsbury Barracks) and large private playing field. Finsbury Barracks has a site area of approximately 2.6 hectares situated between City Road (directly east), Bunhill Row (directly west) and Chiswell Street (directly south).

·       Members were advised that the surrounding area is predominately office/commercial space within the Central Activity Zone and that the nearest residential properties are situated to the east along City Road with No’s , 12, 16 and 18 having apartments in the upper floors that project onto the site.

·       Meeting was advised that works to the main building would be located close to the frontage of the property at the ‘Specials’ office within the mezzanine floor of the west wing of Armoury House and that the proposed alterations would include the removal of a modern partition wall, and introduction of a new wall to rationalise the office accommodation and that the works are on a permanent basis.

·       Sports England was consulted and their comments regarding the restoration and relocation of the cricket net facility following the removal of the temporary facilities was agreed by the applicant. The applicant has agreed to provide temporary practice nets elsewhere on the margins of the cricket pitch which could be removed when not required.

·       A resident who lives in close proximity to the site was concerned about the smell and noise levels from the stable. In additions concerns with the number of restaurants in the vicinity of the proposal, public health of users had not been in to consideration and finally as she lives immediately above this proposal will impact the value of her property.

·       With regards to noise concerns, the Planning Officer informed the meeting that it is a well managed facility and applicant have offered details of a contact to the Council if any disturbance arises.

·       In a response to a question on the numbers of horses on the site, the agent acknowledged 6 horses in the 6 stables.

·       On the question of what type of insulation and ventilation was being proposed for the stable, the Planning Officer advised that stables will open during the day and be closed at night and an acoustic report submitted has no concerns that will arise from the activities there during use.

·       The agent advised Committee that the proposed stables area is considered necessary to facilitate the closure and decommissioning of Wood Street, the City of London Police’s Mounted Unit which requires alternative accommodation.

·       The agent in response highlighted the public benefit as it enables the Police to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 37.

Proposed erection of stables and tack room adjacent to the existing rugby pitch (for a temporary period of 2 years, 6 months), together with permanent internal alterations to the listed 'Specials' office within the mezzanine floor of the west wing of Armoury House.

(Planning application number: P2019/2411/LBC)

Discussion with this application was considered in conjunction with Item B6, although votes with regard to its recommendation was taken separately. In the discussion the following points were made:

·       The application site relates to the Grade II* Listed Armoury House (Finsbury Barracks) and large private playing field. Finsbury Barracks has a site area of approximately 2.6 hectares situated between City Road (directly east), Bunhill Row (directly west) and Chiswell Street (directly south).

·       Members were advised that the surrounding area is predominately office/commercial space within the Central Activity Zone and that the nearest residential properties are situated to the east along City Road with No’s , 12, 16 and 18 having apartments in the upper floors that project onto the site.

·       Members were informed that works to the main building would be located close to the frontage of the property at the ‘Specials’ office within the mezzanine floor of the west wing of Armoury House and that the proposed alterations would include the removal of a modern partition wall, and introduction of a new wall to rationalise the office accommodation and that the works are on a permanent basis.

·       Meeting was informed that Sports England was consulted and their comments regarding the restoration and relocation of the cricket net facility following the removal of the temporary facilities was agreed by the applicant. The applicant has agreed to provide temporary practice nets elsewhere on the margins of the cricket pitch which could be removed when not required.

·       A resident who lives in close proximity to the site was concerned about the smell and noise levels from the stable. In additions concerns with the number of restaurants in the vicinity of the proposal, public health of users had not been in to consideration and finally as she lives immediately above this proposal will impact the value of her property.

·       With regards to noise concerns, the Planning Officer informed the meeting that it is a well managed facility and applicant have offered details of a contact to the Council if any disturbance arises.

·       In a response to a question on the numbers of horses on the site, the agent acknowledged 6 horses in the 6 stables.

·       On the question of what type of insulation and ventilation was being proposed for the stable, the Planning Officer advised that stables will open during the day and closed at night and an acoustic report submitted has no concerns that will arise from the activities there during the day or night.

·       On the insulation and ventilation concerns, a member proposed a condition requesting that the details for sound insulation be submitted. This was seconded and agreed. Wording of additional condition to be delegated to the Planning Officer.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 38.

Replacement of existing antennas, dish and cabinet with 6 no. new antennas, 1 no. dish and 2 replacement equipment cabinets. Removal and replacement of 3 x Remote Radio Units.

(Planning application number: P2019/0778/FUL)

In the discussion the following points were made:

·       The application property is a six-storey office building located at the junction of Goswell Road, Lever Street and Percival Road. It is not listed; however, it is located within the Hat and Feathers Conservation Area. The area is a mixture of residential and commercial properties of varying designs ranging from tower blocks to terraced properties.

·       The proposal will replace the existing 3 no. antennas, 1 no. dish, 3 Remote Radio Units and 1 equipment cabinet (all permitted under P111738).  The Planning Officer mentioned that the proposal will result in an uplift of 3 no antennas and 1 equipment cabinet overall and an increase in height when compared to existing of 2cm, which will still be below the taller existing equipment on the roof used by other operators.  Members were reminded that the essence of the installation is to provide additional 5G coverage along with the existing 4G coverage.  

·       Members were advised that The building is on a prominent corner at a road junction and has a large amount of existing roof top equipment including a mast and antennas on the Percival Street elevation that is approximately 5m in height. There are no listed buildings or locally listed buildings within the immediate context of the application site, which is in the Hat and Feathers Conservation Area. 

·       Meeting was advised that although the Design and Conservation Team consider the antennas to be visible from the public realm, there would be a neutral impact on the character and appearance of the conservation area and visual amenity generally.

·       The Planning Officer advised members that the main issues arising from this proposal relate to its design, harm to the conservation area, neighbouring amenity and public benefit.

·       The proposal has been amended during the course of the assessment of the application with the proposed equipment being moved back from the edge of the building so as to not overhang the parapet line. It is not possible for the equipment to be moved any further back from the edge, as this would impact on the effective operation of the antennas.

·       With regard to the impact of the proposal on the amenity of neighbouring amenity, the Planning Officer reminded Members of  Paragraph 116 of the Framework, that the need for the telecommunication system should not be questioned, nor should health safeguards be determined if the proposal meets International Commission guidelines for public exposure.

·       The application had been submitted with an appropriate Declaration of Conformity by way of the ICNIRP evidencing that the antenna and cabinets do not require noisy mechanical plant such as condensing units or cooling fans. Meeting was advised that in this instance there is no requirement for a noise assessment of the impact or for any conditions to control noise from  ...  view the full minutes text for item 39.