Agenda item

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 does not include its impact from the terraces and the garden or communal areas.  There was also concern that during this period of lockdown, erecting 2 flats on top of a block and its associated construction noise could not be viewed as a proportionate consideration.

·       A leaseholder who had bought her flat since 2007 was concerned with the use of ACL cladding material and officers comment in the report that it is compliant. The resident acknowledged that loss of value is not a valid reason to object, however consideration should be given to issues such as fire risks especially with the narrow door on the ground floor exiting the building. The objector was concerned with the proposal of building two residential units on the roof of a block which has light walls.

·       Members were reminded that with the expected recession following the Covid pandemic, consideration should be given to the well being of present occupiers especially if the construction activities on the roof of Moore Court is left uncompleted and abandoned due to economic uncertainties.

·       In response to a question on why the applicant was not available, the Planning Officer acknowledged that the applicant was aware of the meeting date and was in regular contact with the applicant by correspondence in the last two weeks and had not received any notification that he would not be attending.

·       On the issue of the applicant not in attendance, the Legal Officer informed the meeting that there is no requirement for the applicant to attend, however  if Members were satisfied on the information provided in the reports it could make a determination, however if Members need clarification on some issues from applicant and officers are unable to assist, the item could be deferred should Members make this decision.

·       In response to concerns that officers had agreed to recommend approval in light of the issues raised by the objectors and the lack of consultation, the Planning Officer advised that issues such as clauses between owner and occupiers, fire risk, structural stability are not planning considerations, however the scheme having been assessed on issues such as daylight and sunlight loss, design and impact on conservation area, it was considered acceptable.

·       During deliberation the Chair proposed a motion to defer the item as it would be difficult to proceed as the applicant was not available to respond to issues such as the bin storage, the narrow hallways, consultation process etc. Another Member requested for the item to be refused on grounds of design, the impact of the scheme on the 3 adjoining conservation areas, loss of light, reminding members that this was a site that has always been sensitive in planning terms.

·       Councillor Kay proposed a motion to Defer. This was seconded by Councillor Poyser and carried.

RESOLVED:

That consideration of the application be deferred for the reasons outlined above.