London Borough of Harrow
DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE
WEDNESDAY 30 JULY 2003
PLANNING APPLICATIONS RECEIVED
Contact: Rebecca Arnold, Committee Administrator Tel: 020 8424 1269 E-mail: [email protected]
NOTE FOR THOSE ATTENDING THE MEETING: IF YOU WISH TO DISPOSE OF THIS AGENDA, PLEASE LEAVE IT BEHIND AFTER THE MEETING. IT WILL BE COLLECTED FOR RECYCLING.
DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE
WEDNESDAY 30th JULY 2003
PLANNING APPLICATIONS RECEIVED
SECTION 1 - MAJOR APPLICATIONS
SECTION 2 - OTHER APPLICATIONS RECOMMENDED FOR GRANT
SECTION 3 - OTHER APPLICATIONS RECOMMENDED FOR REFUSAL
SECTION 4 - CONSULTATIONS FROM NEIGHBOURING AUTHORITIES
SECTION 5 - PRIOR APPROVAL APPLICATIONS
______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
All reports have the background information below.
Any additional background information in relation to an individual report will be specified in that report:-
Individual file documents as defined by reference number on Reports.
Nature Conservation in Harrow, Environmental Strategy, October 1991.
Harrow Unitary Development Plan, adopted 28 November 1994
Revised Deposit Draft, Harrow Unitary Development Plan, 21 March 2002
______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE
WEDNESDAY 30th JULY 2003
INDEX
PAGE NO 1/01 30/32 UXBRIDGE RD STANMORE STANMORE PARK P/6/03/CFU/GM GRANT 1 REDEVELOPMENT: TWO X 2 STOREY BLOCKS OF FLATS WITH ACCOMMODATION IN ROOF SPACE TO PROVIDE 14 FLATS WITH BASEMENT AND SURFACE PARKING (REVISED)
1/02 17 – 21 HAYWOOD CLOSE, PINNER PINNER P/939/03/COU/TEM REFUSE 7 OUTLINE: REDEVELOPMENT TO PROVIDE 14 RESIDENTIAL UNITS, ACCESS AND PARKING
1/03 ENTERPRISE HOUSE 15 ST. GREENHILL P/352/03/COU/GM REFUSE 11 JOHN'S RD HARROW OUTLINE: REDEVELOPMENT TO PROVIDE 14 FLATS IN 4 STOREY BUILDING WITH ACCESS AND PARKING
1/04 141A CANTERBURY ROAD, NORTH HEADSTONE SOUTH WEST/575/02/OUT/TW GRANT 16 HARROW OUTLINE: DETACHED 3 STOREY BLOCK TO PROVIDE 15 X 2 BED FLATS WITH TERRACE, ACCESS AND PARKING SPACE
2/01 TIMBERS 41 BROOKSHILL HARROW WEALD P/1362/03/CVA/GM GRANT 20 HARROW WEALD SINGLE STOREY REPLACEMENT BUILDING FOR USE AS PLACE OF WORSHIP AND RELIGIOUS INSTRUCTION (REVISED)
2/02 MILCARS LTD 506 HONEYPOT QUEENSBURY P/842/03/CFU/TEM GRANT 23 LANE STANMORE TWO STOREY EXTENSION TO PROVIDE NEW SHOWROOM FACILITY
2/03 PRINCE EDWARD PLAYING FIELDS QUEENSBURY P/898/03/CDP/TEM GRANT 26 EDGWARE DETAILS OF DESIGN AND APPEARANCE OF BUILDING AND LANDSCAPING PURSUANT TO CONDITION 2 OF OUTLINE PLANNING PERM. EAST/148/01/OUT. FOR FOOTBALL STADIUM ASSOCIATED WORKS.
______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
- 2 – Page No.
2/04 NORTH LONDON COLLEGIATE CANONS P/785/03/CFU/TEM GRANT 31 SCHOOL, CANONS DRIVE, EDGWARE DEMOLITION OF GLAZED LINK CORRIDOR AND REPLACEMENT WITH 4 STOREY EXTENSION TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL TEACHING AND ANCILLARY ACCOMMODATION
2/05 NORTH LONDON COLLEGIATE CANONS P/821/03/CLB/PKL GRANT 31 SCHOOL, CANONS DRIVE, EDGWARE LISTED BUILDING CONSENT: DEMOLITION OF SINGLE STOREY LINK BUILDING AND REPLACEMENT WITH 4 STOREY LINK
2/06 R/O 52-58 CHURCH ROAD, STANMORE PARK P/474/03/CFU/TEM GRANT 38 STANMORE PART SINGLE, PART TWO STOREY OFFICE BUILDING
2/07 ROXBOURNE FIRST & MIDDLE RAYNERS LANE P/843/03/CFU/TEM GRANT 44 SCHOOL 500 TORBAY RD HARROW PROVISION OF SINGLE STOREY CLASSROOM BUILDING
2/08 YATES, 269/271 STATION RD GREENHILL EAST/1381/02/VAR/GM GRANT 47 HARROW VARIATION OF CONDITION 5 OF PLANNING PERMISSION EAST/24/96/FUL TO ALLOW OPENING TO MIDNIGHT ON THURSDAYS, FRIDAYS AND SATURDAYS ON PERMANENT BASIS
2/09 UNIT 3 CHANTRY PLACE HATCH END P/971/03/CFU/TEM GRANT 50 HEADSTONE LANE HARROW UNRESTRICTED USE OF PREMISES FOR B2 (GENERAL INDUSTRIAL) OR B8 (STORAGE AND DISTRIBUTION) PURPOSES
2/10 353 UXBRIDGE RD HATCH END HATCH END P/975/03/CFU/SS1 GRANT 53 CONTINUED USE AS CAFE/SANDWICH BAR (CLASS A3) ON GROUND FLOOR
______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
- 3 –
Page No. 2/11 42 & 44 HIGH ST HARROW ON THE HARROW ON P/1017/03/CFU/SS1 GRANT 55 HILL THE HILL INSTALLATION OF MICROCELL ANTENNA 110mm X 320mm AT HEIGHT OF 6M ON FRONT ELEVATION OF NO.44, WITH FEEDER CABLES TO EQUIPMENT CABINET AT SIDE OF NO.42
2/12 447/449 ALEXANDRA AVE SOUTH RAYNERS LANE P/949/03/CFU/GM GRANT 59 HARROW TWO STOREY AND FIRST FLOOR REAR EXTENSIONS
2/13 118 STANMORE HILL, STANMORE STANMORE PARK P/10/03/CFU/SS1 GRANT 63 TWO STOREY FRONT EXTENSION TO PROVIDE GARAGE WITH LIVING ACCOMMODATION OVER
2/14 19 LAKE VIEW EDGWARE CANONS P/654/03/CFU/SS1 GRANT 66 PROVISION OF SATELLITE DISH ON SIDE ELEVATION
2/15 5 LITTLE COMMON STANMORE STANMORE PARK P/669/03/CFU/SS1 GRANT 68 PROVISION OF SATELLITE DISH ON ROOF, REPLACEMENT GARAGE DOOR AND GATE AT SIDE OF BUILDING.
2/16 5 LITTLE COMMON STANMORE STANMORE PARK P/670/03/CLB/AB GRANT 68 LISTED BUILDING CONSENT: INSTALLATION OF A SATELLITE DISH
2/17 KERRY HOUSE - 15 KERRY AVE CANONS P/567/03/CFU/RJS GRANT 72 STANMORE SUMMERHOUSE IN REAR GARDEN
2/18 16 BEDE CLOSE, PINNER HATCH END P/164/03/CFU/SS1 GRANT 74 FIRST FLOOR AND SINGLE STOREY REAR EXTENSIONS
2/19 72 SILVERSTON WAY, STANMORE BELMONT P/110/03/CFU/TW GRANT 78 SINGLE STOREY REAR AND TWO STOREY SIDE EXTENSIONS
2/20 44 DENNIS LANE STANMORE CANONS P/966/03/CFU/AMH GRANT 81 DEMOLITION OF BUNGALOW, ERECTION OF DETACHED HOUSE
______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
- 4 -
Page No.
3/01 13 VILLAGE WAY EAST, HARROW RAYNERS LANE P/875/03/CFU/SG1 REFUSE 85 CHANGE OF USE: SHOP TO HOT FOOD TAKE AWAY & RESTAURANT (CLASS A1 TO A3) ON GROUND FLOOR, WITH EXTRACTOR DUCTING ON REAR ELEVATION
3/02 123 HEADSTONE RD HARROW GREENHILL P/1262/03/CVA/GM REFUSE 88 VARIATION OF CONDITION 10 OF PLANNING PERMISSION EAST/69/02/FUL TO PERMIT ANCILLARY HOT FOOD TAKE-AWAY SALES
3/03 LAND ON SE SIDE OF JUNCTION OF STANMORE PARK P/815/03/COU/TEM REFUSE 91 MAGPIE HALL ROAD AND HEATHBOURNE ROAD, BUSHEY OUTLINE: SEVEN PART SINGLE, PART TWO AND PART THREE STOREY HOUSES ELEVATED ABOVE GROUND LEVEL, WITH ACCESS AND PARKING
3/04 148 PINNER RD HARROW HEADSTONE SOUTH P/918/03/CFU/TEM REFUSE 96 CHANGE OF USE: RETAIL (A1) TO RESTAURANT/BAR (A3) AT GROUND FLOOR, TO BE OPERATED AS PRIVATE MEMBERS CLUB (RE- SUBMISSION)
3/05 16A UXBRIDGE RD STANMORE STANMORE P/1078/03/CFU/GM REFUSE 99 DEMOLITION OF HOUSE AND PARK REPLACEMENT WITH 4 STOREY BUILDING WITH BASEMENT PARKING TO PROVIDE FOUR FLATS
3/06 MOUNT PARK MANOR HARROW ON WEST/1210/02/CCO/SS1 REFUSE 105 (FORMERLY CARLYON HOUSE), THE HILL MOUNT PARK ROAD, HARROW RETENTION OF TELESCOPIC POOL COVER.
5/01 O/S ON ROAD IN FRONT OF 332 ROXBOURNE P/1453/03/CDT/SS1 REFUSE 109 ALEXANDRA AVENUE, SOUTH HARROW PROVISION OF 12M COLUMN MAST WITH THREE INTEGRAL ANTENNAS, EQUIPMENT CABINET AND A/C CABINET
______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
SECTION 1 - MAJOR APPLICATIONS 1/01 30/32 UXBRIDGE ROAD, STANMORE P/6/03/CFU/GM Ward: STANMORE PARK
REDEVELOPMENT: TWO X 2 STOREY BLOCKS OF FLATS WITH ACCOMMODATION IN ROOF SPACE TO PROVIDE 14 FLATS WITH BASEMENT AND SURFACE PARKING (REVISED)
PEARSON ASSOCIATES FOR MR & MRS COLE
RECOMMENDATION
Plan Nos: 20243/01; 20A; 21; 22; 23; 24; 25; 26; 27; 28; 29
GRANT permission in accordance with the development described in the application and submitted plans, subject to the following condition(s):
1 Time Limit - Full Permission 2 Prior to commencement of the development hereby permitted, a scheme of hard and soft landscape works shall be submitted to and approved by, the Local Planning Authority.
The Landscape details submitted shall include indications of all existing trees and hedgerows on the land and details of any to be retained, together with measures for their protection in the course of development; existing and proposed ground levels, boundary treatment, underground services, hardsurfacing materials, and a scheme for the planting and management of the river corridor. The proposed tree planting details shall include planting plans; written specifications (including cultivation and other operations associated with plant establishment); schedules of trees, noting species, size and proposed numbers; and a programme of implementation. In this condition "retained tree" means an existing tree which is to be retained in accordance with the approved plans and particulars; and paragraphs (i) and (ii) below shall have effect until the expiration of 1 year from the date of the occupation of the building for its permitted use.
i) No retained tree shall be cut down, uprooted or destroyed, nor shall any retained tree be topped or lopped other than in accordance with the approved plans and particulars, without the written approval of the local planning authority. Any topping or lopping approved shall be carried out in accordance with British Standard 3998 (Tree Work). ii) If any retained tree is moved, uprooted or destroyed or dies, another tree shall be planted at the same place and that tree shall be of such size and species, and shall be planted at such time, as may be specified in writing by the local planning authority.
continued/
1 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
Item 1/01 - P/6/03/CFU continued.....
iii) The erection of fencing for the protection of any retained tree shall be undertaken in accordance with the approved plans and particulars before any equipment, machinery or materials are brought on to the site for the purposes of the development, and shall be maintained until all equipment, machinery and surplus materials have been removed from the site. Nothing shall be stored or placed in any area fenced in accordance with this condition and the ground levels within those areas shall not be altered, nor shall any excavation be made, without the written consent of the Local Planning Authority. REASON: To safeguard the appearance and character of the area, and to enhance the appearance of the development. 3 All planting, seeding or turfing comprised in the approved details of landscaping shall be carried out in the first planting and seeding seasons following the occupation of the building(s), or the completion of the development, whichever is the sooner; and any trees or plants which, within a period of 5 years from the completion of the development, die, are removed, or become seriously damaged or diseased, shall be replaced in the next planting season, with others of a similar size and species, unless the local planning authority gives written consent to any variation. REASON: To safeguard the appearance and character of the area, and to enhance the appearance of the development. 4 Prior to the commencement of development of any works on site, means of securing the site with 2m high close boarded fencing (as appropriate so as not to damage boundary hedging to be retained as part of the landscaping proposals) shall be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. REASON: In the interests of amenity and highway safety. 5 The building shall not be occupied until the car parking, loading and turning areas shown on drawing Nos. 20243/20A and 20243/23 have been drained and surfaced in accordance with details submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. The parking areas shall be permanently marked out and shall not thereafter be used for any purpose other than the parking of private motor vehicles of the occupiers of the flats or their visitors. REASON: To ensure the satisfactory provision of parking areas, to safeguard the appearance of the locality and in the interests of highway safety. 6 Development shall not begin until details of the junction between the proposed access road and the highway have been approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, and the building shall not be occupied until that junction has been constructed in accordance with the approved details. REASON: To ensure that the proposed development does not prejudice the free flow of traffic or the conditions of general safety along the neighbouring highway. 7 Prior to the occupation of the building, the existing access to No.30 shall be closed and the highway reinstated according to details agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. REASON: To confine access to the permitted points in order to ensure that the development does not prejudice the free flow of traffic or the conditions of general safety along the neighbouring highway.
continued/
2 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
Item 1/01 - P/6/03/CFU continued.....
8 Prior to the commencement of development hereby approved, details of the means of the storage of refuse and vehicular access thereto shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved refuse storage facilities shall be installed prior to the first occupation of the flats and shall be retained in use as long as the use hereby permitted remains. REASON: To ensure adequate standards of hygiene and refuse/waste collection without prejudice to the enjoyment by neighbouring occupiers of their properties. 9 Development shall not begin until surface water attenuation/storage works have been carried out in accordance with details to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. REASON: To prevent the increased risk of flooding. 10 The development hereby permitted shall not commence until samples of the materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces noted below have been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the local planning authority: (a) the extension/building(s) The development shall be completed in accordance with the approved details and shall thereafter be retained. REASON: To safeguard the appearance of the locality. INFORMATIVES: 1 Standard Informative 19 - Flank Windows 2 Standard Informative 23 - Considerate Contractor Code of Practice 3 Standard Informative 27 - Access for All 4 Standard Informative 32 - The Party Wall etc. Act 1996 5 Standard Informative 35 - CDM Regulations 1994 6 Standard Informative 41 - UDP & Deposit Draft UDP Policies & Proposals (E4, E6, E7, E25, E27, E29, E45, H8, T13), (SEP5, SD1, SH1, EP29, D4, D5, D11, T13, H4, H5, H8)
MAIN CONSIDERATIONS 1) Character and Visual Amenity 2) Residential Amenity 3) Trees 4) Parking and Highways 5) Consultation Responses
INFORMATION The planning conditions recommended are taken from the appeal decision for the 12 flat development of the site and are not the Council's standard conditions. a) Summary UDP Key Policies: E4, E6, E7, E25, E27, E29, E45, H8, T13 Deposit UDP Key Policies: SEP5, SD1, SH1, EP29, D4, D5, D11, T13, H4, H5, H8 Car Parking Standard: 26 (24) Justified: 26 (24) Provided: 24 (24)
continued/
3 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
Item 1/01 - P/6/03/CFU continued.....
Site Area: 0.42h Habitable Rooms: 61 No. of Residential Units: 14 Density: 33.3dph 145hrph Council Interest: None b) Site Description • north-western side of Uxbridge Road, containing 2 substantial detached houses with separate accesses from Uxbridge Road • no.32 is sited on the corner with Bentley Way, a private road consisting of two storey detached properties • rear of site abuts flank boundary of 2 Bentley Way, whilst to the east lies site of 28, 28a and 28b Uxbridge Road where redevelopment for flats is taking place • Edgware Brook runs along eastern flank of site • within area of major tree mass • flatted development of Sherbourne Place due south on opposite side of Uxbridge Road c) Proposal Details • revised application following previous approvals, which maintains same building form and site layout but achieves 2 additional flats by virtue of reducing the size of 2 of the flats in Block A, the block adjacent to the new development at 28 Uxbridge Road • sunken landscaped area incorporated in rear garden to provide for flood alleviation • all other aspects of the development remain as previously approved • in detail the application comprises: - demolition of 2 houses - two, two storey blocks with accommodation in the roof - single access from Uxbridge Road replacing existing two with 3 visitors parking spaces at front and basement parking for 21 cars accessed via ramp on easternmost side of site - communal amenity space of 1,590m2 excluding shared courtyard between blocks and space at front of site providing setting for buildings - minimum rear garden depth of 20m behind Block B, 25.8m behind Block A - Block A adjacent to no. 28a would comprise 8 flats and be larger than Block B which would comprise 6 flats - blocks would have crown roofs with dormer windows and gable features facing Uxbridge Road and no.2 Bentley Way - ramped access to basement car parking; services access across frontage to visitors spaces
continued/
4 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
Item 1/01 - P/6/03/CFU continued..... d) Relevant History
EAST/1053/00/OUT Outline: redevelopment: 2/3 storey building REFUSED for 12 flats, with rooms in roof, access and 06-JUL-01 basement parking Reason for refusal: "The proposed development would, by reason of excessive scale of buildings, be unduly obtrusive on this prominent corner site to the detriment of the open character of the junction of Bentley Way with Uxbridge Road." Allowed on Appeal 15-FEB-02
EAST/375/02/DET Approval of details pursuant to condition 1 of APPROVED planning permission EAST/1053/00/OUT, 22-MAY-02 relating to design and external appearance e) Applicant’s Statement • design identical to that approved under the details pursuant application for 12 flats • internal layout of Block A amended by replacing two larger flats at ground and first floor level with two smaller family flats and adding two one bedroom units • reason for reconfiguration is due to advice from local estate agents and provides for mix of unit sizes which accord with Council policy and Government advice f) Consultations TWU: No objections EA: Comments awaited
Advertisement Major Development Expiry 09-FEB-03
Notifications Sent Replies Expiry 66 6 28-JAN-03
Response: Remain opposed to development; serious effect on ambience of Bentley Way; concern at drainage facilities; concern that parking will occur on Uxbridge Road; overlooking; insufficient landscaping of sufficient height; detrimental effect on appearance of Bentley Way; will add to traffic congestion; loss of light; overdevelopment; concern at tree loss.
APPRAISAL
1) Character and Visual Amenity The design details remain unchanged from the previously approved details pursuant application. In visual terms the proposal must therefore be considered acceptable, having the same external appearance. The internal subdivision to provide 2 additional units would have no impact on the character of the area. The increase in density would be minor and the density would still be comfortably within the range set out in Policy H5 of the revised deposit draft UDP. continued/ 5 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
Item 1/01 - P/6/03/CFU continued.....
2) Residential Amenity Given that there would be no changes to the buildings size or appearance, it is not considered that the addition of 2 units would affect the neighbours residential amenity. The proposal would also be acceptable in terms of the amenity of future occupiers of the new flats. There would remain an area in excess of the Council's minimum standard for rear amenity space (1,590m2 provided against a requirement of 1,380m2).
3) Trees No additional tree loss would occur in relation to the approved scheme.
4) Parking and Highways There would be a deficiency of 2 parking spaces in relation to the Council's current parking standards. There would not be a shortfall if the revised deposit draft UDP standards were used however. In these circumstances it is considered that it would be unreasonable to raise objections on parking grounds. In terms of any additional traffic this would be minimal in relation to traffic flows on Uxbridge Road.
5) Consultation Responses The principle of the development has already been approved. The only change compared to the scheme allowed on appeal is the subdivision of 2 larger units to 4 smaller units. The buildings size would not change, nor would the position of windows. With regard to drainage, there are no objections from the relevant authorities or the Council's Drainage Engineers. A sunken landscaped area has been incorporated into the rear amenity space to provide for flood alleviation at the request of the Environment Agency. No additional trees would be lost.
6 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
1/02 17-21 HAYWOOD CLOSE, PINNER P/939/03/COU/TEM Ward: PINNER
OUTLINE:REDEVELOPMENT TO PROVIDE 14 RESIDENTIAL UNITS, ACCESS AND PARKING
LENNON PLANNING LTD for TIERRA DEVELOPMENTS
RECOMMENDATION
Plan Nos: 1:1250 plan, 2003/JPLH/001.
REFUSE permission for the development described in the application and submitted plans for the following reason(s):
1 The proposed development, by virtue of the size, siting, form and site coverage of buildings would give rise to overdevelopment of the site, result in excessive hardsurfacing and the direct and potential loss of trees, and be unacceptably out of character and detrimental to the character and appearance of the area. 2 The proposed development would give rise to unsatisfactory relationships with neighbouring properties, and result in overlooking and losses of outlook, privacy, light and residential amenity to adjacent occupiers. 3 Refusal - Parking and Amenity Impact
INFORMATIVES 1 INFORMATIVE: Notwithstanding the note on your submitted plan(s), this decision has been made on the basis of measurements scaled from the plan(s), unless a dimensioned measurement overrides it. 2 Standard Informative 41 - UDP & Deposit Draft UDP Policies & Proposals : (E6, E45, T13); ( SD1, D4, D5, T13)
MAIN CONSIDERATIONS
1) Appearance and Character of Area 2) Residential Amenity 3) Parking 4) Consultation Responses
INFORMATION a) Summary
UDP Key Policies: E6, E45, T13 Deposit UDP Key Policies: SD1, D4, D5, T13 continued/ 7 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
Item 1/02 - P/939/03/COU continued…..
Car Parking Standard: 29 (23) Justified: See Report Provided: 20 Site Area: 0.4 ha Habitable Rooms: 72 approx No. of Residential Units: 14 Density: 35 dph 180 hrph approx Council Interest: None b) Site Description
• northern end of Haywood Close, residential cul-de-sac of bungalows in spacious sites • occupied by 3 bungalows in an irregular line across head of cul-de-sac • some mature trees within site and along its boundaries together with heavy vegetation • 2 bungalows in Haywood Close abut south-eastern boundary • grounds of Chelsea House, detached 2-storey dwelling, adjacent to south-west boundary • 2-storey houses and bungalows in Antoneys Close beyond north-western boundary • car park in Antoneys Close and open land in The Grail abut north-eastern boundary c) Proposal Details
• outline application for residential redevelopment, siting and means of access to be determined at outline stage • demolition of existing 3 bungalows, development of 14 dwellings in following form • 2 detached houses (1 x 4 bed, 1 x 5 bed) adjacent to south-eastern boundary, 1 on each side of new access from centre of existing turning head • terrace of dwellings in slightly staggered formation on north-east/south/west alignment, containing following accommodation : 4 x 1 bed flats, 4 x 3 bed split-level flats, 4 x 4/5 bed town houses • the agent states that the height of the development would be primarily 2 storeys, with accommodation in the roofspace • parking is proposed in the following form : double garage for 5-bed detached house, integral garage plus driveway for town houses and 4-bed detached house, 1 front garden space per flat d) Relevant History
None continued/
8 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
Item 1/02 - P/939/03/COU continued….. e) Applicant’s Statement
• site comprises previously developed land • range and mix of house types proposed • proposals make more efficient use of site and comply with relevant criteria including privacy distances, amenity space, parking etc f) Consultations
Thames Water: Informative suggested
Advertisement Major Development Expiry 17-JUL-03
Notifications Sent Replies Expiry 38 34 09-JUL-03
Response: Out of character, loss of privacy, overlooking, traffic congestion, inadequate parking, pollution, overdevelopment, traffic increase, noise, overshadowing, loss of trees, detriment to wildlife, inadequate drainage, subsidence, disturbance during building operations, devaluation, loss of light, eyesore, unacceptable design, too high density.
APPRAISAL
1) Appearance and Character of Area
Haywood Close comprises low density development of bungalows, with spacious front and rear gardens and generous space between buildings on wide plots. The proposed development however, by reason of its more intensive form, cramped sitings, mostly linear layout, intended height of buildings and levels of activity would be excessively out of character and contrast unfavourable with the form of development in the Close. As well as conflicting with policies in the adopted and draft replacement UDP’s the proposals would compromise the quality of the environment, contrary to the requirements of para. 54 of PPG3. The proposals would also lead to the direct loss of trees adjacent to the boundary with No. 15 Haywood Close, and threaten mature pine trees in the rear garden of No. 17, plus other trees which are outside the site, but would be close to the proposed houses. Excessive amounts of hardsurfacing would be provided at the front of the proposed terrace, in contrast to the green and verdant appearance of the Close. For the above reasons it is considered that the proposals would give rise to overdevelopment of the site, out of character and detrimental to the character and appearance of the area.
continued/
9 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
Item 1/02 - P/939/03/COU continued…..
2) Residential Amenity
The rear wall of the proposed 5-bed detached house would be less than 4m from the adjacent garden boundary of No. 15 Haywood Close, demonstrating further the extent of overdevelopment and giving rise to overshadowing, overlooking, and consequent losses of privacy, outlook and light to the occupiers of the adjacent house. The other detached house would have a rear garden depth of between 3 and 10m, leading to the overlooking of the side garden of No. 16 Haywood Close. The south-western flank wall of the terrace would be less than 2m from the side boundary of Chelsea House, resulting in a loss of outlook from the rear garden and peripheral overlooking of the neighbouring garden from the upper floors.
A rear garden depth of only 10.5m is shown behind the south-western end of the terrace, and while there is heavy evergreen planting along the rear boundary, it is not protected, and overlooking of Antony’s Close would result if it were removed, or thinned out. Rear garden depths increase towards the north-eastern end of the terrace such that neighbouring amenity should be preserved.
3) Parking
The level of on-site parking would fail to meet standards in both the adopted and Draft Replacement UDPs. This would be likely to give rise to on-street parking which, due to the restricted 5m width of the proposed access road, could well result in congestion and the likely obstruction of vehicle movements from the proposed front garden driveways and parking spaces.
4) Consultation Responses
• pollution, noise – it is not considered that these would cause excessive detriment as a result of the proposals • detriment to wildlife – the land is not a site of Nature Conservation Importance • inadequate drainage, subsidence – these issues are covered by other legislation • disturbance during building operations, devaluation – these are not material planing considerations • other issues discussed in report
10 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
1/03 ENTERPRISE HOUSE, 15 ST. JOHN'S ROAD, HARROW P/352/03/COU/GM Ward: GREENHILL
OUTLINE: REDEVELOPMENT TO PROVIDE 14 FLATS IN 4 STOREY BUILDING WITH ACCESS AND PARKING
DALTON WARNERS DAVIS for CONLATUSE LTD
RECOMMENDATION
Plan Nos: 1901/L(0)01; 02; 03; 04; 05
REFUSE permission for the development described in the application and submitted plans for the following reason(s):
1 The application fails to allow for the provision of a rear service road and access thereto contrary to the provisions of both the adopted and the revised deposit draft UDPs and would therefore be detrimental to the free flow and safety of traffic on the adjoining highway(s). INFORMATIVE: 1 Standard Informative 41 - UDP & Deposit Draft UDP Policies & Proposals (E6, E45, E47, T13, T24, H1, H8, EM1, New Employment Policy), (SD1, SH1, D4, D5, T13, T19, H4, H5, EM16)
MAIN CONSIDERATIONS 1) Streetscene/Visual Amenity 2) Residential Amenity 3) Employment Policy 4) Housing Policy 5) Parking and Highways Issues 6) Consultation Responses
INFORMATION a) Summary UDP Key Policies: E6, E45, E47, T13, T24, H1, H8, EM1, New Employment Policy Deposit UDP Key Policies: SD1, SH1, D4, D5, T13, T19, H4, H5, EM16 Town Centre Harrow Car Parking Standard: 21 (23) Justified: 21 (23) Provided: 14 Site Area: 0.08ha Habitable Rooms: 42 No. of Residential Units: 14 Density: 175dph, 525hrph Council Interest: None continued/ 11 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
Item 1/03 - P/352/03/COU continued..... b) Site Description • two storey building on north-eastern side of St. John's Road with 5 garages to the rear • no.17 to the south-east is a 4 storey residential care home whilst no.13 to the north- west is a 4 storey office development • to the rear of the site lies Nightingale Court, a residential development of 39 flats accessed from Sheepcote Road • within Harrow town centre boundary c) Proposal Details • demolition of existing building • outline application with only siting and means of access to be determined, proposing redevelopment to provide 4 storey building of 14 flats, with access under building to 12 parking spaces at rear and 2 spaces at front of site • all flats to be 2 bedroom (3 habitable room) • flank windows to both sides and front and rear balconies integral to design on illustrative plans • building of modern design with butterfly-style roof indicated on illustrative elevations d) Relevant History HAR/2584 Two rooms ground floor as film library GRANTED 20-DEC-49
HAR/3543 Use premises as a guest house GRANTED 20-JUL-50
LBH/3440/4 Alterations to elevations and roof (revised) GRANTED 06-JAN-70
LBH/3440/5 Erection of five lock-up garages at rear GRANTED 01-APR-70
LBH/3440/6 Erection of front entrance porch GRANTED 27-APR-70
Erection of ground and 1st floor extensions to GRANTED LBH/3440/8 rear of existing offices 03-DEC-76
LBH/3440/9 Erection of 2 storey side to rear extension to GRANTED provide additional office accommodation 13-JUL-78
EAST/423/95/FUL Change of use from offices to educational REFUSED use (tutorial college) 18-OCT-95
continued/
12 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
Item 1/03 - P/352/03/COU continued.....
Reasons for refusal: "1. The proposal would result in the loss of a Class B1 site in the strategic centre contrary to the policies of the UDP. 2. The proposal would be provided with inadequate parking and servicing for the intended use. 3. The proposal would be prejudicial to the implementation of the proposed service road network indicated in the Harrow Unitary Development Plan."
e) Applicant’s Statement The applicant has submitted a lengthy planning statement and highways report to justify the application. The key points are as follows: • the service road is no longer required following developments on Sheepcote Road and the fact that St. John's Road is now one-way • Government advice would no longer support the service road provision • the existing parts of the service road already built are sub standard • other changes of use and redevelopments for residential have been allowed nearby • site is within town centre where there are many facilities, including public transport, and proposal would accord with advice of PPG3 • building was not purpose-built for offices, does not meet modern office standards and there is plenty of vacant office floorspace in the town centre and Borough as a whole • previous occupier has moved to other premises and there would be no harm to the local economy • new building designed to recognise patterns established by existing developments along same side of St. John's Road • modern design and materials, compliant with Part M of building regulations • sustainable form of development • cycle storage and refuse store incorporated within ground floor of building f) Consultations TWU: No objection EA: Unable to respond
Advertisement Major Development Expiry 03-APR-03
Notifications Sent Replies Expiry 89 1 24-MAR-03 Response: Proposals unsuitable as no provision made for widening of access onto St. John's Road or for rear service road as required by the UDP. Service road provisions are in place at nos. 5, 7, 9, 11 and 13; plans are unsatisfactory and not of high standard; out of character with development opposite; should be redeveloped for offices; loss of mature trees
continued/
13 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
Item 1/03 - P/352/03/COU continued.....
APPRAISAL 1) Streetscene/Visual Amenity In terms of the general streetscene, a four storey building would be appropriate for the site, matching that of the building to either side. Whilst only siting and means of access are to be determined, the applicant has included detailed elevations which show a modern building design with low pitched roof rising to the front and rear from a central valley. Whilst this would differ from the more traditional buildings in the vicinity it is one of Harrow's strengths that the town centre contains a varied style of building design. The building would be energy efficient and would contribute to the diversity within the town centre.
2) Residential Amenity Tapley Court, the residential home to the south includes flank windows however these serve corridors/landings and staircases and there would be no loss of amenity from the proposal. On the opposite flank there is an office building and again there would be no loss of amenity from the proposal. For occupiers of the new building, they would be aware of the flank windows facing them prior to occupation.
Whilst there would be no communal amenity space provision, several of the flats would have balconies. In addition it is relevant that the site is within the town centre where access to other facilities is high. Both the recent Platinum House and Roxborough Heights developments had little or no amenity space.
3) Employment Policy In strict terms the proposal does not meet the criteria of Policy EM16 of the revised deposit draft UDP. The unit has only relatively recently been vacated and has not been actively marketed. The building was not purpose built as an office however and does not meet modern office standards. In addition there is currently an over supply of office floorspace in the town centre. Given the small scale of office floorspace involved it is not considered that this should be an overriding issue.
4) Housing Policy The proposal would involve previously developed land, and although of a high density would not be out of character with its surroundings. Government advice suggests that town centres should accommodate higher density developments to ease pressure on outlying areas. The relationship with adjoining properties would be acceptable and it is therefore considered that there would be no conflict with the Council's housing policies.
continued/
14 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
Item 1/03 - P/352/03/COU continued.....
5) Parking and Highways Issues In terms of parking provision, the proposal is considered to be acceptable, given the town centre location where there is excellent access to public transport. The proposal fails however to make provision for an access and rear service road which are a proposal in both the adopted and revised deposit draft UDP's. During the preparation of the replacement UDP the service road proposals were all reviewed and some dropped however in this case it was considered that the need to further reduce the number of accesses onto Sheepcote Road was still valid. There were no objections to the service road proposal and it is expected that it will continue to feature in the final approved version of the replacement plan.
There is therefore a fundamental objection to the proposal on this ground.
6) Consultation Responses These are largely addressed in the report. The plans are for small units in a modern building and are not considered to be either unsatisfactory or of a low standard, they would be appropriate for the location. There are no trees of significant amenity value indicated to be lost.
15 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
1/04 141A CANTERBURY ROAD, NORTH HARROW WEST/575/02/OUT/TW Ward: HEADSTONE SOUTH OUTLINE: DETACHED 3 STOREY BLOCK TO PROVIDE 15 X 2 BED FLATS WITH TERRACE, ACCESS AND PARKING SPACE
MONTAGU EVANS FOR MR J CHRISTIE &MS M RICHARDSON
RECOMMENDATION
Plan Nos: Site plan and plan dated October 2001
GRANT permission in accordance with the development described in the application and submitted plans, subject to the following condition(s):
1 Time Limit - Outline Permission 2 Approval of the details shown below (the "reserved matters") shall be obtained from the local planning authority in writing before any development is commenced: (a) siting of the building(s) (b) design of the building(s) (c) external appearance of the building(s) (d) means of access (e) landscaping of the site REASON: To comply with the provisions of Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. 3 Parking for Occupants - Parking Spaces 4 The development hereby permitted shall not commence until a scheme for:- (a) The storage and disposal of refuse/waste has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the local planning authority. The development shall not be occupied or used until the works have been completed in accordance with the approved details and shall thereafter be retained. REASON: To ensure adequate standards of hygiene and refuse/waste collection without prejudice to the enjoyment by neighbouring occupiers of their properties. 5 Disabled Access - Buildings INFORMATIVES: 1 Standard Informative 23 - Considerate Contractor Code of Practice 2 Standard Informative 27 - Access for All 3 Standard Informative 32 - The Party Wall etc. Act 1996 4 Standard Informative 41 - UDP & Deposit Draft UDP Policies & Proposals (E6, E45, T13). (SD1, D4, D5, T13)
MAIN CONSIDERATIONS 1) Character of the Area 2) Amenity of Neighbours 3) Accessibility 4) Consultation Responses ______continued/
16 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
Item 1/04 - WEST/575/02/OUT continued.....
INFORMATION
Consideration of this application was deferred at the 11th December Committee meeting in order to clarify issues in relation to access, house ownership and highway safety.
Consideration of this application was deferred at the Development Control Committee meeting on 9th July in order to allow further consideration of objections given the delay since the original deferral. a) Summary UDP Key Policies: E6, E45, T13 SD1, D4, D5, T13 Car Parking Standard: 21 (21) Justified: 21 (21) Provided: 19 (illustrative) 19 (illustrative) Site Area: 0.166ha No. of Residential Units: 15 No. of Habitable rooms: 270 per ha. Density: 90 units per ha. Council Interest: None b) Site Description
• plot of land on the south eastern side of Apsley Close, to the east is the Old Lyonians Sports Ground • the site is currently occupied by a two storey building which is vacant • Allington Road and Apsley Close are made up of blocks of three storey flats and two storey terraced houses c) Proposal Details
• outline proposal with all matters reserved, for redevelopment to provide 15 flats in a 3 storey block • illustrative drawings are provided which indicate a block fronting Apsley Close with some surface parking and some undercroft parking d) Relevant History
None
continued/
17 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
Item 1/04 - WEST/575/02/OUT continued..... e) Consultations
EA: Awaited TWU: Awaited
Advertisement Major Development Expiry 15-AUG-02
Notifications Sent Replies Expiry 37 87 05-AUG-02 Response: Overdevelopment, lack of amenity space, inadequate car parking, highway safety, loss of privacy
APPRAISAL
1) Character of the Area
The surrounding area contains examples of similarly proportioned blocks of flats, on similarly sized, and in some cases smaller, plots of land.
The submitted illustrative scheme demonstrates that a block of similar proportions with a similar amount of amenity space can be provided when compared to nearby developments. The proposal would not therefore be out of character with the prevailing pattern of development.
2) Amenity of Neighbours
The illustrative scheme demonstrates that separation distances could be achieved which would preserve the amenity of neighbours. A distance of 22m is indicated between the existing block of flats to the north and the proposed flank elevation of the new block.
With regard to properties to the south on Canterbury Road, the distance from the rear elevation of the existing houses to the illustrative block would be a minimum of 35m.
In these circumstances problems of overlooking and overbearing impact would not be created and the amenities of neighbours would not be prejudiced.
It is considered that the principle of such a development would not have a detrimental impact on the amenity of neighbours.
continued/
18 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
Item 1/04 - WEST/575/02/OUT continued.....
3) Accessibility
A condition is recommended in order that suitable provision is made.
4) Consultation Responses
All matters raised addressed in appraisal.
19 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
SECTION 2 - OTHER APPLICATIONS RECOMMENDED FOR GRANT 2/01 TIMBERS, 41 BROOKSHILL, HARROW WEALD P/1362/03/CVA/GM Ward: HARROW WEALD
SINGLE STOREY REPLACEMENT BUILDING FOR USE AS PLACE OF WORSHIP AND RELIGIOUS INSTRUCTION (REVISED)
DEREK E ALAN NASH for MAHAVIR FOUNDATION LTD
RECOMMENDATION
Plan Nos: 703/10; 703/8-1; 703/8-2; 703/8-3; 703/8-4
GRANT variation(s) in accordance with the development described in the application and submitted plans as follows:
1 Time Limit - Full Permission 2 Noise from Music and Amplified Sound 3 Water Storage Works INFORMATIVES: 1 Standard Informative 23 - Considerate Contractor Code of Practice 2 Standard Informative 32 - The Party Wall etc. Act 1996 3 Standard Informative 35 - CDM Regulations 1994 4 Standard Informative 36 - Measurements from Submitted Plans 5 Standard Informative 41 - UDP & Deposit Draft UDP Policies & Proposals (E1, E2, E4, E6, E8, E9 (Revised), E10 (Revised), E11 (Revised), E46, T13, C11), (SEP5, SD1, EP32, EP33, EP34, D4, T13, C13) 6 The applicants are reminded of their previous statement to the Council that the site would not be used for large gatherings and are requested to manage their use of the site in future accordingly to minimise disturbance for adjoining occupiers.
MAIN CONSIDERATIONS 1) Green Belt and Area of Special Character 2) Consultation Responses
INFORMATION a) Summary UDP Key Policies: E1, E2, E4, E6, E8, E9 (Revised), E10 (Revised), E11 (Revised), E46, T13, C11 Deposit UDP Key Policies: SEP5, SD1, EP32, EP33, EP34, D4, T13, C13 Area of Special Character: Green Belt Site Area: 0.26ha. Floorspace: 225m2 Council Interest: None continued/ 20 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
Item 2/01 - P/1362/03/CVA continued..... b) Site Description • vacant site, formerly occupied by a detached chalet bungalow, on western side of Brookshill • formerly used as clinic with 5 consulting rooms, permission granted for replacement building (to be used for religious purposes) in December 2002 • abuts Harrow Weald Park • within Green Belt and Area of Special Character c) Proposal Details • replacement of chalet bungalow with single storey building with flat roof with side parapet and front canopy • siting similar to previous building • proposal differs from previously approved scheme by virtue of raised ground level (up to 1m) with building as a result up to 1m higher, revised roof treatment and additional ornamental detail to elevations consisting of marble pilasters and door/window surrounds with reconstructed Cotswold stone cornice • there would also be a new tarmac footpath laid from the car park to facilitate disabled persons access to the building • there would be no increase in the footprint or floorspace of the building over that previously approved d) Relevant History The site has a long planning history as a site for a dwelling and a doctors surgery. The most recent applications are as follows:
EAST/641/01/CLE Certificate of Lawful Existing Use: Use as GRANTED clinic 14-AUG-01
EAST/113/02/FUL Single storey rear extension and removal of GRANTED existing dormer windows 05-JUN-02
EAST/1286/02/FUL Single storey replacement building for use as GRANTED place of worship and religious instruction 12-DEC-02
e) Applicant’s Statement • proposal is for changes to site levels and elevational treatment of the building • materials would be 'butterley red bank' bricks with majestic (red multi) for main walls and orient (gold multi) above cornice and in recessed band at lower level, white marble and reconstructed Cotswold stone
continued/
21 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
Item 2/01 - P/1362/03/CVA continued..... f) Consultations TWU No objection EA: No comments on proposal
Notifications Sent Replies Expiry 7 69 07-JUL-03
Response: 69 additional letters of objection: Object to how developers have gone about planning process; no further applications should be accepted; object to increased height; overdominant; design out of keeping; out of character; concern at recent extent of parking due to use of site; conditions should be applied to numbers of visitors, times of attendances and services and parking on surrounding roads if allowed; greater notification of residents should have occurred; wholly inappropriate for a Green Belt site and very special circumstances do not apply; concern at large number of people who recently visited the site; concern of traffic safety due to siting on dangerous bend.
APPRAISAL 1) Green Belt and Area of Special Character The new proposal involves raising the ground level where the building would be sited to allow for improved access. At present the building is set in a dip. Whilst this would result in a slightly more prominent building it is not considered that this would affect the openness or character of the Green Belt or the Area of Special Character in which it lies. The building would remain set back from the road frontage and existing trees which provide screening would remain.
The alterations to the elevations and roof would enhance the appearance of the new building, but whilst representing a material change would not give rise to any harm.
The new footpath would facilitate access from the car park and would not be obtrusive.
Overall it is considered that the revised proposal would have a neutral impact on the Green Belt and Area of Special Character when compared to the approved scheme. However, the proposal is considered to be marginal and any further changes would be likely to be unacceptable.
2) Consultation Responses None
22 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
2/02 MILCARS LTD, 506 HONEYPOT LANE, STANMORE P/842/03/CFU/TEM Ward: QUEENSBURY
TWO STOREY EXTENSION TO PROVIDE NEW SHOWROOM FACILITY
SDA ARCHITECTS LTD for MILCARS LTD
RECOMMENDATION
Plan Nos: 1:1250 Land Registry Plan, SDA021SP, P0054/,01A,02A,03A,04A, 05, 06, 07
GRANT permission in accordance with the development described in the application and submitted plans, subject to the following condition(s):
1 Time Limit - Full Permission 2 The development hereby permitted shall not commence until samples of the materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces noted below have been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the local planning authority: (a) the extension/building(s) The development shall be completed in accordance with the approved details and shall thereafter be retained. REASON: To safeguard the appearance of the locality. 3 The development hereby permitted shall not be occupied until the car parking area(s) shown on the approved plan number(s)P0054/01A have been constructed and surfaced with impervious materials, and drained in accordance with details submitted to, and approved in writing by, the local planning authority. The car parking spaces shall be permanently marked out and used for no other purpose, at any time, without the written permission of the local planning authority. REASON: To ensure the satisfactory provision of parking areas, to safeguard the appearance of the locality and in the interests of highway safety. INFORMATIVE: 1 Standard Informative 23 - Considerate Contractor Code of Practice 2 Standard Informative 32 - The Party Wall etc. Act 1996 3 Standard Informative 35 - CDM Regulations 1994 4 Standard Informative 36 - Measurements from Submitted Plans 5 Standard Informative 41 - UDP & Deposit Draft UDP Policies & Proposals (E6. E46, EM4, T13), (SD1, D4, D6, EM15, T13)
MAIN CONSIDERATIONS 1) Employment Policy 2) Appearance and Character of Area 3) Residential Amenity 4) Parking 5) Consultation Responses ______continued/
23 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
Item 2/02 - P/842/03/CFU continued.....
INFORMATION a) Summary UDP Key Policies: E6. E46, EM4, T13 Deposit UDP Key Policies: SD1, D4, D6, EM15, T13 Car Parking Standard: 5 (no standard) Justified: See report Provided: 6 Site Area: 2740m2 Floorspace: 751m2 Council Interest: None b) Site Description • east side of Honeypot Lane, on southern corner of junction with Wigton Gardens within Honeypot Lane/Dalston Gardens Industrial Estate • occupied by single/3 storey buildings in use for car sales, repair, servicing, and offices • vehicle accesses provided from Wigton Gardens and service road alongside Honeypot Lane • open parking along road frontages • residential uses to north • commercial uses immediately adjacent to east and south c) Proposal Details • demolition of single storey projection adjacent to Honeypot Lane used as car showroom • erection of 2 storey extension to 3 storey building, linked by single storey element, to provide car showroom and sales areas on both floors • car lift at rear provides access to 1st floor • north-west corner of extension roughly lining with existing wall facing Wigton Gardens, northern wall angled further away from Wigton Gardens • western flank wall chamfered to follow boundary of site • 3m separation between extension and 3 storey building • predominantly glazed elevations, flat roof, western and northern walls splay outwards towards upper levels • 6 customer parking spaces fronting Wigton Gardens d) Relevant History None e) Notifications Sent Replies Expiry 48 2 30-MAY-03 Response: Parking or traffic flows should not obstruct service road, object
continued/
24 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
Item 2/02 - P/842/03/CFU continued.....
APPRAISAL
1) Employment Policy The proposed extension would occupy the westernmost part of the site which is currently used for car sales in the form of a showroom and an open air car display area.
The proposal would not therefore reduce the area within the land which is used for car repairs and servicing, in accordance with the industrial designation of the site.
In these circumstances there is no conflict with employment policy.
2) Appearance and Character of Area The proposal would be subordinate in height to the 3 storey building, with adequate separation provided by the 3m gap between the buildings.
Although higher than the 2 storey industrial building to the south, the impact would be reduced by the lightweight, glazed appearance of the extension. The outward splay of the flank wall facing Honeypot Lane would provide a feature of interest, without being dominant in the streetscene. Overall it is considered that an acceptable impact on the appearance and character of the area would result.
3) Residential Amenity The proposal would face the flank wall and rear garden of a house on the northern corner of Wigton Gardens and Honeypot Lane at a distance of at least 25m. In these circumstances no harm to residential outlook or amenity would result.
4) Parking An adequate number of spaces for customers visiting the showroom would be provided, in accordance with the adopted UDP standard.
In addition some 70 spaces are available for the storage of cars awaiting servicing and repair in a basement car park within this site, and on an adjacent site to the east which is in the control of the applicant. These would be unaffected by the proposals.
Given the above, it is not considered that the proposals would give rise to parking or traffic congestion.
5) Consultation Responses Discussed in report
25 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
2/03 PRINCE EDWARD PLAYING FIELDS, EDGWARE P/898/03/CDP/TEM Ward: QUEENSBURY
DETAILS OF DESIGN AND APPEARANCE OF BUILDING AND LANDSCAPING PURSUANT TO CONDITION 2 OF OUTLINE PLANNING PERM. EAST/148/01/OUT. FOR FOOTBALL STADIUM ASSOCIATED WORKS.
G C A ARCHITECTS LTD for WEALDSTONE FOOTBALL CLUB LTD
RECOMMENDATION
1) APPROVE
Plan Nos: 734/L01C, L02B, L03A, L04, L05, L06C, L07A : E3102/726/01, 02
INFORMATIVES 1 The applicant is advised that the following conditions are still outstanding: 3, 4, 5, 6 (protection measures), 8, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 27, 32, 33, 34 2 Standard Informative 41 - UDP & Deposit Draft UDP Policies & Proposals : (E6, E29, E46); (SD1, D4, D11, D25)
2) AGREE as a minor amendment to revised size and siting of stadium shown on drawings 734/L01C, L02B, L05.
MAIN CONSIDERATIONS
1) Appearance and Character of Area 2) Neighbouring Amenity 3) Size and Siting of Stadium 4) Consultation Responses
INFORMATION a) Summary
UDP Key Policies: E6, E29, E46 Deposit UDP Key Policies: SD1, D4, D11, D25 Site Area 17.8 ha Floorspace: 4,302m2 Council Interest: None
continued/
26 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
Item 2/03 - P/898/03/CDP continued….. b) Site Description
• site occupies just under 18 ha within large residential area to the west of Edgware District Centre and south of Canons Park Tube Station • comprises open playing fields, providing pitches for football and cricket until previous owners, London Borough of Camden, discontinued the use some 8 years ago, pitches currently being restored • previous buildings and tennis/netball courts mostly removed or broken up • access from Whitchurch Lane abut northern boundary • access also provided from St David’s Drive to south-east corner of site • wide tarmac footpath along the eastern boundary of the land, flanked by residential properties in Torbridge Close, Buckingham Gardens, Bransgrove Road and St David’s Drive. Little Stanmore School also adjacent to this boundary • residential properties on north side of Camrose Avenue abut the southern boundary • service road located between front of those properties and Camrose Avenue • Jubilee railway line abuts tree lined western boundary of the playing fields • tracks sited on an embankment along most of this flank. However, towards southern boundary the line goes into a cutting before passes beneath Camrose Avenue • railway land is a site of Nature Conservation Interest • Edgware Brook crosses the site some 250m form northern boundary, and land slopes gently down from each end towards it • brook bordered by vegetation, particularly along western boundary where adjacent to railway embankment • mature trees south of the tennis courts behind Whitchurch Lane • site forms part of green corridor extending northwards into Canons Park Open Space and adjacent railway line • Canons Park Underground Station and several bus routes close to the Whitchurch Lane access, with a bus route running along Camrose Avenue c) Proposal Details
• reserved matters application seeking approval to details of design and external appearance of football stadium, and floodlight structures, plus landscaping • siting of stadium and means of access from Camrose Avenue determined at outline stage • stadium elevations comprise micro-rib insulted composite panels in grey and blue colours, profiled metal deck pitched roof • main stand on east side of ground maximum 9m high containing 600 seats plus following facilities, inter alia, at ground-floor level:- conference/banqueting, foyer, lounge with bar, kitchen, changing facilities, home/away changing rooms, physiotherapy, gymnasium, pool, wet changing areas • first-floor facilities, inter alia, comprise:- conference/banqueting, gym, kids gym, aerobics, changing rooms • covered terraces each holding 1,100 people provided on north and south sides of pitch, terraced buildings 5.6m high continued/
27 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
Item 2/03 - P/898/03/CDP continued…..
• open terrace on west side of pitch holding 1,200 people • total capacity 4,000 people • 4 x 20m high floodlight pylons around stadium 1 at each corner • 6 x 13m high floodlight pylons around synthetic pitch to south of stadium • 14 x 10m high floodlight pylons around 6 tennis courts to south-east of stadium • landscaping proposals comprise woodland planting mix close to southern boundary with Camrose Avenue and along south-east boundary • Committee’s agreement also sought for minor amendments to approved size and siting of stadium d) Relevant History
EAST/148/01/OUT Outline: Football Stadium, Terraces, Stand & GRANTED Clubhouse, Floodlights To Ground, Artificial Pitch 11-APR-03 & Tennis Courts, Health & Fitness Facilities, WITH LEGAL Parking, Vehicular Access From Camrose AGREEMENT Avenue e) Consultations
Environment Agency: No Objection
Notifications Sent Replies Expiry 574 4 27-MAY-03
Response: Object to stadium in residential area, detriment to neighbouring residents, on-street parking, noise, devaluation, overshadowing.
APPRAISAL
1) Appearance and Character of Area
By definition, the proposed football stadium would be an imposing building that would have a significant impact upon the appearance of the site. However, its maximum height of 9m would be relatively modest and would not dominate the open space give the total area of the site. The proposed design of the building is considered to be acceptable in the context of its purpose, and with the use also of different coloured materials would provide a satisfactory impact upon the character of the open space.
The 20m high floodlight pylons around the stadium would be seen partly against the backdrop of a treed area alongside the Jubilee railway line, reducing their impact. The remaining pylons around the synthetic football pitch and tennis courts are considered to be acceptable given the overall size of the site, and the enhancement they would provided to these open air sports facilities. The lights to the synthetic pitch would be 1m lower and those around the tennis courts the same height as shown in outline application. continued/
28 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
Item 2/03 - P/898/03/CDP continued…..
The landscaping proposals would serve to provide a screen t the southern end of the land and complement existing vegetation around the other boundaries of the site.
2) Neighbouring Amenity
The proposed stadium and associated floodlights would be sited a minimum of 130m from the nearest residential boundaries in Camrose Avenue, sufficient distance to provide an acceptable impact upon the outlook from those properties.
The stadium would be separated from the rear boundaries of houses in Aldridge Avenue, some 55m away by a tree belt and the Jubilee railway line. Thus screening would be provided and in addition the open terrace would be located on this side of the site to further instigate the impact of the proposal.
The height of the remaining floodlight structures would not be unduly obtrusive given that they would be at least 24m from the nearest residential boundary. Lighting details have been submitted pursuant to Condition 20 of the outline permission, and these are under consideration.
3) Size and Siting of Stadium
The outline permission which was approved by Committee in May 2001 relates to a 3,000 capacity, within a stadium with a maximum width of 118m and depth of 98m. Since then non-league standards have changed, and a 4,000 capacity, as shown here, is required to enable Wealdstone FC to climb the non-league adder. This has resulted in a increase in the overall footprint of the stadium to a width of 125m and depth of 100m.
In addition the stadium has been resited slightly so that whereas the approved siting plan shows its to be 15m from the western boundary in a parallel position, the current plan shows it on an angled plan between 15 and 25m from the boundary. The revised siting still meets the London Ecology Unit recommended minimum distance from the boundary of 15m, and given the size of the site would provide minimal impact on the land. Nor, it is considered, would the small increase in the footprint of the stadium.
In terms of capacity, the Committee is advised that a 1998 application (EAST/672/98/OUT) which proposed a 3,000 capacity stadium supported by 630 parking spaces was called in by the DETR to consider the transportation aspects of the scheme. The application was withdrawn and subsequent applications, including the outline permission, established a provision of 300 spaces plus a Green Transport Plan. continued/
29 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
Item 2/03 - P/898/03/CDP continued…..
300 parking spaces, albeit in a revised form, are still shown, and the approved Green Transport Plan commits the applicant to pursuing means of reducing reliance on the private motor car. In addition, the legal agreement allows for the introduction of Controlled Parking Zones on both the Camrose Avenue and Whitchurch Lane sides of the site, subject to public consultation. In the light of these safeguards it is suggested that the amended size and siting of the stadium can be accepted.
4) Consultation Responses
• object to stadium in residential area, noise, on-street parking – these issues were discussed at the outline stage • overshadowing – this would not arise given the distance of the building form residential boundaries • devaluation – not a planning issue • other issues discussed in report
30 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
2/04 NORTH LONDON COLLEGIATE SCHOOL, CANONS P/785/03/CFU/TEM DRIVE, EDGWARE Ward: CANONS
DEMOLITION OF GLAZED LINK CORRIDOR AND REPLACEMENT WITH 4 STOREY EXTENSION TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL TEACHING AND ANCILLARY ACCOMMODATION
NVB ARCHITECTS FOR NORTH LONDON COLLEGIATE SCHOOL
2/05 NORTH LONDON COLLEGIATE SCHOOL, CANONS P/821/03/CLB/PKL DRIVE, EDGWARE Ward: CANONS
LISTED BUILDING CONSENT: DEMOLITION OF SINGLE STOREY LINK BUILDING AND REPLACEMENT WITH 4 STOREY LINK
NVB ARCHITECTS for NORTH LONDON COLLEGIATE SCHOOL
P/785/03/CFU
RECOMMENDATION
Plan Nos: AL (0) 03A, 07B, 08b, 10B, 15, 16, 17
GRANT permission in accordance with the development described in the application and submitted plans, subject to the following condition(s)
1 Time Limit - Full Permission 2 All new external and internal works and finishes and works of making good shall match the existing original work in respect of materials used, detailed execution and finished appearance, except where indicated otherwise on the drawings hereby approved or as required by any conditions attached to the consent. REASON: To protect the special architectural or historic interest of the listed building. 3 Detailed drawings, specifications, or samples of materials as appropriate in respect of the following shall be agreed in writing by the local planning authority before the relevant part of the work is begun: a) Samples to be submitted of all external materials b) Sample brick panel showing proposed brick, bond type and mortar type c) Further details to be submitted showing how the design of junctions between the existing buildings and link building will be addressed. REASON: To protect the special architectural or historic interest of the listed building.
continued/ 31 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
Item 2/04 & 2/05 - P/785/03/CFU & P/821/03/CLB continued…..
INFORMATIVES 1 Standard Informative 41 - UDP & Deposit Draft UDP Policies & Proposals : (E6, E18, E19, E34, E38, E46, C8); (SD1, EP43, EP44, D4, D12, D16, D17, D20, C10)
P/821/03/CLB
RECOMMENDATION
Plan Nos: AL (0) 03A, 04, 07B, 08B, 10B, 15, 16, 17
GRANT listed building consent in accordance with the works described in the application and submitted plans, subject to the following
1 Time Limit - Listed Bldg./Cons. Area Consent 2 All new external and internal works and finishes and works of making good shall match the existing original work in respect of materials used, detailed execution and finished appearance, except where indicated otherwise on the drawings hereby approved or as required by any conditions attached to the consent. REASON: To protect the special architectural or historic interest of the listed building. 3 Detailed drawings, specifications, or samples of materials as appropriate in respect of the following shall be agreed in writing by the local planning authority before the relevant part of the work is begun: a) Samples to be submitted of all external materials b) Sample brick panel showing proposed brick, bond type and mortar type c) Further details to be submitted showing how the design of junctions between the existing buildings and link building will be addressed. REASON: To protect the special architectural or historic interest of the listed building.
INFORMATIVES 1 Standard Informative 41 - UDP & Deposit Draft UDP Policies & Proposals : (E6, E18, E19, E34, E38, E46, C8); (SD1, EP43, EP44, D4, D12, D16, D17, D20, C10) 2 Informative for Approval of Details with Conditions
MAIN CONSIDERATIONS
1) Metropolitan Open Land 2) Listed Building 3) Character of Conservation Area 4) Registered Park 5) Neighbouring Amenity 6) Education Policy 7) Consultation Responses continued/
32 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
Item 2/04 & 2/05 - P/785/03/CFU & P/821/03/CLB continued…..
INFORMATION
This application was deferred at the meeting of the Development Control Committee on 9th July for a Members Site Visit which took place on 21st July. a) Summary
UDP Key Policies: E6, E18, E19, E34, E38, E46, C8 Deposit UDP Key Policies: SD1, EP43, EP44, D4, D12, D16, D17, D20, C10 Listed Building: Grade II Conservation Area: Canons Park Estate Floorspace: 903m2 Council Interest: None b) Site Description
• NLCS occupies extensive grounds between Edgware and Stanmore • vehicular accesses from Canons Drive and Dalkeith Grove • within Canons Park Estate Conservation Area and Registered Park • designated Metropolitan Open Land • listed buildings within the grounds bb) Listed Building Description
• C18 core of house built on the site of Canons Mansion • substantially rebuilt in C19 and recased in stone by C E Mallows 1910 • three storeys • irregular elevational treatment with chancelled ground storey and Corinthian pilaster decoration • some interior features of interest • school buildings to north by A E Richardson are not of special interest
Registered Park Description
• remaining part of an early C18 landscaped park laid out for James Brydges, the first Duke of Chandos, by Alexander Blackwell, later modified by Humphry Repton, with a kitchen garden re-designed in 1938 as the George V Memorial garden and formal gardens of c.1920 by the architect Charles E Mallows. c) Proposal Details
• demolition of single-storey glazed corridor link between 4-storey Richardson building, and single-storey gym/drama block • erection of 4-storey extension to Richardson building to provide 2 classrooms and archive store on ground-floor, lecture theatre, 2 offices and classroom on 1st floor, 4 classrooms on second floor, and 2 laboratories and prep room on fourth floor continued/
33 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
Item 2/04 & 2/05 - P/785/03/CFU & P/821/03/CLB continued…..
• proposal would line up with main front wall of adjoining 4-storey block, and be set forward of rear wall • flat roof, brick and render front wall, brick side and rear walls d) Relevant History
EAST/446/94/FUL Single Storey Infants School Building GRANTED Detached Sick Room Accommodation And 09-SEP-94 Infill Extension To Junior School WITH ACCOMPANYING LEGAL AGREEMENT
There have been a large number of other planning and listed building consent applications in relation to this site, but these do not have any bearing on the current applications. e) Applicant’s Statement
• new academic space badly needed to accommodate AS system and international baccalaureate examinations • proposal would allow more appropriate administration and social facilities to be provided in some existing rooms in mansion which are currently being used for teaching but are inappropriate by current educational standards f) Consultations
P/785/03/CFU
CAAC: Question if this proposal will increase numbers of potential students – and if it is in line with the agreed development framework for the school? The two distinct buildings should not be merged so there should be a separate link. Suggest a lighter and lower glazed element. If brick is used the bond used should match the existing building rather than be of the stretcher type.
Garden History Response received, do not wish to comment. Society:
Advertisement Character of Conservation Area Expiry Setting of Listed Building 05-JUN-03
continued/
34 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
Item 2/04 & 2/05 - P/785/03/CFU & P/821/03/CLB continued…..
Notifications Sent Replies Expiry 45 1 16-MAY-03
Response: Excessive size, height and scale; noise and disturbance from traffic and parking; impact on amenity and character of area.
P/821/03/CLB
Advertisement Extension of Listed Building Expiry 05-JUN-03
Notifications Sent Replies Expiry 45 0 20-MAY-03
APPRAISAL
1) Metropolitan Open Land
The legal agreement which accompanies planning permission EAST/446/94/FUL defines a building envelope within which all new development in the school should take place. The current proposals are contained within the envelope and therefore comply with this requirement of the agreement, retaining openness within the site. Pupil numbers would not rise above the existing figure of 1,015, within the 1,250 limit set by the agreement.
2) Listed Building
The list description for this listed building specifically states that the Richardson buildings, which the proposed link building would be directly attached to, are not of special interest. They are only considered listed by virtue of being attached to the C18 house which is of special interest. Consequently the main consideration is what impact the proposal would have on the principal listed building, which is at some distance from the proposals, rather than any direct alterations which would need to be made to the built fabric of the Richardson buildings.
The proposed link building has been carefully designed so that it would fit in well with the Richardson buildings, due to its architectural details, location and scale. Where a new material is proposed, the external elevation render, this is employed in a conservative manner which would simply help identify the building as a new extension rather than make it stand out in an obtrusive way. The building would follow the building lines of the 4 storey building which it would be attached to on one side, and on the east elevation it would be partially set back from these building lines.
continued/
35 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
Item 2/04 & 2/05 - P/785/03/CFU & P/821/03/CLB continued…..
The result would be an attractive extension, which, whilst readily identifiable as being new, would not be a dominant feature within the site, and would in fact be a minor sympathetic accretion when considered in the context of all the built forms on the site. The building would not impede any views of the main listed building. So the proposal would not have a detrimental impact on the main listed building in that it would not dominate it or its setting, and would in fact have very little impact on either.
3) Character and Appearance of the Conservation Area
North London Collegiate School forms a large mass of buildings of varying quality located in open space within the Canons Park Estate Conservation Area. The school site is well shielded by a variety of trees and shrubs so any clear views of the proposal site will only be seen from within the school grounds.
The design of the proposed link building fits in well with the 4 storey building to which it would be attached on one side. It would not be a dominating feature within the conservation area. As a component of the whole site the proposed building would not add any significant bulk to the total built form within it. Th existing gap which it would infill only facilitates views across an unattractive single storey glazed walkway building to a set of tennis courts in one direction, and a dense set of trees in the other direction. It is not felt that either of these views are essential in contributing to the overall character and appearance of the conservation area so infilling the gap is considered acceptable. Existing buildings in the vicinity already enclose a central pond located to the west of the proposal area and the infill building would add to this sense of enclosure.
Overall it is considered that the proposal would preserve the character and appearance of the conservation area.
4) Registered Park
As mentioned elsewhere, The Garden History Society did not wish to make comments on this application. It is considered that the proposals would not have an impact on the Registered Park as they would be sited within that part of the land which has already been developed, and in addition the school site is surrounded by dense tree and shrub cover.
5) Neighbouring Amenity
The nearest residential boundary is some 90m from the proposed development, and amenity would not therefore be impaired.
6) Education Policy
The proposals generally comply with the criteria in adopted Policy C8, and as they are in accordance with other relevant policies, can be accepted in relation to Replacement Policy C10. continued/
36 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
Item 2/04 & 2/05 - P/785/03/CFU & P/821/03/CLB continued…..
7) Consultation Responses
• noise and disturbance from traffic and parking – as the proposals do not involve an increase in pupil numbers, no change would take place to traffic and parking levels • CAAC comments – exactly what type of brick bond to be used in the brick sections of the proposed link building can be dealt with by condition • other issues discussed in report
37 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
2/06 R/O 52-58 CHURCH ROAD, STANMORE P/474/03/CFU/TEM Ward: STANMORE PARK PART SINGLE, PART TWO STOREY OFFICE BUILDING
HARVEY & PARTNERS
RECOMMENDATION
Plan Nos: 1:1250 plan, 20.014.02(P), 001, 002, 003, 004, 005, 006, 007A
GRANT permission in accordance with the development described in the application and submitted plans, subject to no material objection being received in relation to the advertisement regarding the setting of the listed wall and subject also to the following condition(s):
1 Time Limit - Full Permission 2 The development hereby permitted shall not commence until samples of the materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces noted below have been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the local planning authority: (a) the extension/building(s) The development shall be completed in accordance with the approved details and shall thereafter be retained. REASON: To safeguard the appearance of the locality. 3 No development shall take place until a plan indicating the positions, design, materials and type of boundary treatment to be erected has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the local planning authority. The boundary treatment shall be completed: b: before the building(s) is/are occupied The development shall be completed in accordance with the approved details and shall thereafter be retained. REASON: To safeguard the amenity of neighbouring residents and the character of the locality. 4 Landscaping to be Approved 5 Landscaping to be Implemented 6 Trees - No Lopping, Topping or Felling 7 Levels to be Approved 8 The development hereby permitted shall not be occupied until the car and cycle parking, turning and loading area(s) shown on the approved plan number(s) 20.014.02 (P)002have been constructed and surfaced with impervious materials, and drained in accordance with details submitted to, and approved in writing by, the local planning authority. The car parking spaces shall be permanently marked out and used for no other purpose, at any time, without the written permission of the local planning authority. REASON: To ensure the satisfactory provision of parking areas, to safeguard the appearance of the locality and in the interests of highway safety.
continued/
38 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
Item 2/06 - P/474/03/CFU continued.....
9 The development hereby permitted shall not commence until a scheme for:- (a) The storage and disposal of refuse/waste (b) and vehicular access thereto has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the local planning authority. The development shall not be occupied or used until the works have been completed in accordance with the approved details and shall thereafter be retained. REASON: To ensure adequate standards of hygiene and refuse/waste collection without prejudice to the enjoyment by neighbouring occupiers of their properties. 10 Restrict Storage to Buildings 11 The premises shall be used for the purpose specified on the application and for no other purpose, including any other purpose in Class B1 of the Schedule to the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987 (or in any provision equivalent to that Class in any Statutory Instrument revoking and re-enacting that order with or without modification). REASON: To safeguard the amenity of neighbouring residents and the character of the locality. 12 The window(s) in the north-east flank wall(s) of the proposed development shall: (a) be of purpose-made obscure glass, (b) be permanently fixed closed below a height of 1.8m above finished floor level, and shall thereafter be retained in that form. REASON: To safeguard the amenity of neighbouring residents. INFORMATIVES: 1 Standard Informative 23 - Considerate Contractor Code of Practice 2 Standard Informative 32 - The Party Wall etc. Act 1996 3 Standard Informative 36 - Measurements from Submitted Plans 4 Standard Informative 41 - UDP & Deposit Draft UDP Policies & Proposals (E6, E29, E38, E46, EM3, T13), (SD1`, D4, D7, D11, D16, T13, EM4, EM23) 5 Non-Standard Informative - The applicant is advised that, in seeking to discharge the requirements of conditions 4 and 5, the Council will require a high quality of landscaping around the boundaries of the site.
MAIN CONSIDERATIONS 1) Employment Policy 2) Appearance and Character of Area and Conservation Area 3) Neighbouring Amenity 4) Accessibility 5) Parking and Traffic 6) Setting of Listed Wall 7) Consultation Responses
continued/
39 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
Item 2/06 - P/474/03/CFU continued.....
INFORMATION At the meeting of 3rd June 2003, consideration of this item was deferred for a Members' Site Visit. This took place on 30th June 2003. Since the last meeting the application has been advertised in terms of the setting of the listed wall which separates the site from Bernays Gardens. A section on the impact of the proposals on the wall is included in this report.
At the meeting of 9th July 2003 consideration of this item was deferred in order to invite any additional comments from Elm Park Residents Association who were notified at a relatively late stage. a) Summary UDP Key Policies: E6, E29, E38, E46, EM3, T13 Deposit UDP Key Policies: SD1, D4, D7, D11, D16, T13, EM4, EM23 Town Centre Stanmore Car Parking Standard: 14 (3) Justified: See Report Provided: 6 Site Area: 679m2 Floorspace: 470m2 Council Interest: Council owned site b) Site Description • south side of Church Road • western end of service road from Elm Park which runs behind nos. 40-58 Church Road, commercial uses on ground floor with residential above • comprises cleared vacant site last used for car parking in connection with car showroom on Church Road frontage • service road and properties in Church Road to north of site • end of row of lock-up garages and residential premises in Elm Park to the east • trees and vegetation within garden of the Church House adjacent to southern boundary • high listed wall, about 4m high, along boundary of Bernays Gardens and garden of Church House Cottage abuts site to east • Old Church Lane Conservation Area contiguous with western and southern boundaries of site • tree cover and vegetation on all sides apart from northern boundary c) Proposal Details • development of site for B1 office purposes • 2-storey building on rear part of site with single storey front projection at eastern end • brick and glazed elevations, shallow metal profiled roof oversailing flank walls • 6 parking spaces on northern part of site including disabled bay, plus bicycle parking area beneath canopy to single storey element
continued/
40 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
Item 2/06 - P/474/03/CFU continued..... d) Relevant History
LBH/19634 Continued consent to park motor vehicles at GRANTED rear 23-SEP-81
EAST/988/02/LA3 Temporary surface level car park with GRANTED access from Elm Park 08-NOV-02 e) Applicant’s Statement
• contrary to the Elm Park Residents’ Association’s view the application was properly publicised and advertised • listed wall is not an issue and in any event is at significantly more risk from current abuse by cars/vehicles/vandalism • the Council has no objections in relation to trees • proposed soft landscaping and high quality design and external finishes would minimise any potential impact on the adjacent conservation area – the officers’ report confirms this • the proposal would result in a substantial improvement to the site • the application arose from the Council’s request for financial offers for the site within the context of guidance from an approved development brief • any decision should be made objectively and solely on planning grounds f) Consultations CAAC: No objections TWU: No objections EA: Unable to respond
Advertisement Character and appearance Expiry of Conservation Area 28-MAY-03
Setting of Listed Building Expiry 10-JUN-03
Notifications Sent Replies Expiry 32 1 10-APR-03
Response: Letter received from Elm Park Residents Association objecting to the fact that they had not formally been notified of the proposal, that there was no advertisement in the newspaper, and that a site notice had not been displayed. Objecting also to the fact that proposal would affect a listed wall; would be visible when trees around the site lose their leaves and that the building would be evident for several months of the year; existing trees would be thinned or removed; impact on neighbouring conservation area; object to design of building and materials to be used; wrong to justify this proposal on employment grounds as 5 employees are not new but existing employees; inadequate notification. continued/
41 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
Item 2/06 - P/474/03/CFU continued.....
APPRAISAL
1) Employment Policy This site lies on the edge of Stanmore District Centre. Given this location and the availability of public transport the principle of office development would comply with Policy EM4 of the Replacement UDP.
2) Appearance and Character of Area and Conservation Area At present this site is derelict and the proposal would bring the land back into beneficial use. The distinctive design of the building would comply with Policy D7 and is considered to be appropriate given the proposed commercial use.
The proposed layout would allow for planting around the site boundaries to improve the appearance of the development. Existing trees which surround the site would not be adversely affected . In Conservation Area terms the building would be screened from land at the rear of The Church House by mature trees and vegetation.
Such tree cover would also largely obscure views from Bernays Gardens. Glimpses of the building above the high boundary wall would not be obtrusive given the glazed first floor and almost flat roof.
In conclusion, it is considered that the proposals would improve the appearance of the area and preserve the character of the Conservation Area.
3) Neighbouring Amenity In terms of no.4 Elm Park high level blanked out facing windows are proposed at first floor level to prevent overlooking of the neighbouring premises. In addition an outbuilding with pitched roof at the rear of no.4 would partially screen views of the proposed building, which would be about 18m from the rear wall of no.4. A large yew tree at the far end of the back garden of no.6 Elm Park would largely obscure the proposed building, and blanked out high level windows in the flank wall are shown to obviate overlooking. A separation distance of some 25m would be provided between the rear wall of no.6 and the proposed development, providing a satisfactory relationship.
4) Accessibility A disabled parking bay is shown to serve the development and Building Regulations requirements would ensure that satisfactory access into the building is provided.
5) Parking and Traffic A small over-provision of parking is proposed in comparison with the standards in the Replacement UDP, but this is not excessive given the adopted UDP requirement for 14 spaces to serve the development.
continued/
42 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
Item 2/06 - P/474/03/CFU continued.....
6) Setting of Listed Wall The proposed building would be sited between 3m and 5m from the wall, sufficient to safeguard the physical integrity of the wall. A planting strip is shown next to the wall, and it is considered that the size and siting of the building would not be overbearing in relation to the listed structure.
7) Consultation Responses None
43 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
2/07 ROXBOURNE FIRST & MIDDLE SCHOOL, P/843/03/CFU/TEM 500 TORBAY ROAD, HARROW Ward: RAYNERS LANE
PROVISION OF SINGLE STOREY CLASSROOM BUILDING
HEAD OF PROPERTY & DEVELOPMENT for EDUCATION DEPT
RECOMMENDATION
Plan Nos: E4966B/2, 3A, 6
GRANT permission in accordance with the development described in the application and submitted plans, subject to the following condition(s):
1 Time Limit - Full Permission 2 The development hereby permitted shall not commence until samples of the materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces noted below have been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the local planning authority: (a) the extension/building(s) The development shall be completed in accordance with the approved details and shall thereafter be retained. REASON: To safeguard the appearance of the locality. 3 Disabled access - buildings INFORMATIVES: 1 Standard Informative 23 - Considerate Contractor Code of Practice 2 Standard Informative 41 - UDP & Deposit Draft UDP Policies & Proposals (E6, E21, E46, C4, C8, A4), (SD1, SEP5, EP46, D4, C10, C20) 3 Standard Informative 27 - Access for All
MAIN CONSIDERATIONS 1) Education Policy 2) Impact on Open Space and Appearance of the Area 3) Residential Amenity 4) Accessibility 5) Consultation Responses
INFORMATION a) Summary UDP Key Policies: E6, E21, E46, C4, C8, A4 Deposit UDP Key Policies: SD1, SEP5, EP46, D4, C10, C20 Site Area: 2.75ha. Floorspace: 105m2 Council Interest: Council owned school continued/
44 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
Item 2/07 - P/843/03/CFU continued..... b) Site Description • First and Middle School occupied by mainly 2 storey building plus mobile classrooms • 45m wide playing field, designated as open space, comprises northern part of site • rear boundaries of houses in Yeading Avenue, Waverley Road and Torbay Road adjacent to north-western, north-eastern and south-eastern boundaries respectively • recreation ground in L.B. Hillingdon abuts south-western boundary c) Proposal Details • provision of single storey classroom in northern corner of playing field • 12.2m length x 8.6m width x 3.9m height to top of shallow pitched roof • timber structure with aggregate finish • ramped and stepped access d) Relevant History Various permissions have been granted for mobile classrooms within the site since 1969 e) Applicant’s Statement • existing classroom for reception children (ages 4-5) is too small and has no secure play area attached • new classroom with play area required to implement foundation stage curriculum • not viable financially to extend existing building • site sheltered on 2 sides by tall hedge, in line with existing mobile classrooms, provides easy access for parents and children • for most of year school unable to use field because of waterlogging • proposed classroom would provide modern teaching space with toilets and storage facilities, plus an attached, secure play area visible from the classroom f) Consultations L.B. Hillingdon Awaited
Notifications Sent Replies Expiry 28 1 09-JUL-03
APPRAISAL
1) Education Policy Adopted Policy C4 and Deposit Replacement Policy C6 commit the Council to ensuring that First and Middle School provision matches population requirements. The proposed classroom, being required to implement the foundation stage curriculum, complies in principle with the above policies.
The proposal meets the criteria set down in adopted policy C8, and while supported in principle by Deposit Replacement Policy C10, also needs to be considered against other policies to fully meet the terms of that policy. continued/
45 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
Item 2/07 - P/843/03/CFU continued.....
2) Open Space and Appearance of the Area The proposed building would be sited within 13m of the north-eastern and north- western boundaries of the designated open space, and would remove an area of some 115m2 from the open space, including the access ramp and steps. A strip of open space over 100m in length would remain to the south-east of the building. The integrity of the open space would largely be preserved by the proposal, and given the educational need, it is considered that the proposed building can be supported in terms of adopted policy E21 and Deposit Replacement Policy EP46. In visual terms the proposal would be mostly screened by a high hedge, further reducing the impact of the building on the appearance of the area.
3) Residential Amenity The proposed building would be about 20m and 17m from the rear boundaries of houses in Yeading Avenue and Waverley Road respectively, with a high hedge and service road in between. Given these separation distances and its single storey character, the proposal would have minimal impact on neighbouring residential amenity.
4) Accessibility Satisfactory access into the building would be provided by an accessible ramp and flight of steps.
5) Consultation Responses Awaited
46 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
2/08 YATES, 269/271 STATION ROAD, HARROW EAST/1381/02/VAR/GM Ward: GREENHILL
VARIATION OF CONDITION 5 OF PLANNING PERMISSION EAST/24/96/FUL TO ALLOW OPENING TO MIDNIGHT ON THURSDAYS, FRIDAYS AND SATURDAYS ON PERMANENT BASIS
GRAHAM BOLTON PLANN. PTNRSHP FOR YATES GROUP PLC
RECOMMENDATION
Plan Nos: Site plan received 04-NOV-02.
GRANT variation(s) in accordance with the development described in the application and submitted plans, subject to the following conditions and subject to the prior receipt of a Unilateral Undertaking under Section 106 of the Town & Country Planning Act 1990 to secure the provision of £3,000 towards Town Centre improvements payable with effect from the date of this decision.
1 The premises shall not be open to customers except between 10.30 hours and 23.00 hours on Mondays to Wednesdays, 10.30 hours and midnight on Thursdays to Saturdays and 10.30 to 22.30 hours on Sundays, without the prior written permission of the local planning authority. REASON: To ensure that the proposed development does not prejudice the enjoyment by neighbouring occupiers of their properties. INFORMATIVE: 1 Standard Informative 41 - UDP & Deposit Draft UDP Policies & Proposals (E51), (EP25)
MAIN CONSIDERATIONS 1) Amenity of Neighbours 2) Consultation Responses
INFORMATION This application was deferred at the meeting of the Development Control Committee on 11th December in order to seek a contribution towards the Council's town centre improvements fund. The applicant has offered a contribution of £3,000 as set out in the report. a) Summary
UDP Key Policies: E51 Deposit UDP Key Policies: EP25 Town Centre Harrow Council Interest: Contribution to Town Centre Infrastructure continued/ 47 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
Item 2/08 - EAST/1381/02/VAR continued….. b) Site Description • north-western side of Station Road, close to the junction with Sheepcote Road and opposite St John the Baptist Church • terraced unit forming end of key shopping frontage of Harrow Strategic Centre, adjoining unit to north is within secondary shopping frontage • surrounding properties comprise mainly commercial uses but there are residential flats above 249 – 267 Station Road to the immediate north c) Proposal Details • to allow trading at the premises on a permanent basis on Thursdays, Fridays and Saturdays until midnight, with an additional half hour drinking-up time d) Relevant History
EAST/24/96/FUL Change of Use: Retail to Licensed Premises GRANTED with Food (Class A1 to A3), and Shopfront 06-JUN-96 Condition 5 of this permission states: "The permission shall not be used except between 10.30 hours and 23.00 hours, Monday to Saturday inclusive, and between 10.30 hours and 22.30 hours on Sundays, without the written permission of the local planning authority. REASON: To safeguard the amenity of neighbouring residents."
EAST/658/00/VAR Variation Of Condition 5 Of Planning GRANTED Permission East/24/96/Ful To Allow Opening 29-SEP-00 To Midnight Thursday – Saturday Condition 2 of this permission limited the variation to a 1 year period only.
EAST/1013/01/VAR Permanent Variation Of Condition 5 Of GRANTED Planning Permission East/24/96/Ful To Allow 09-NOV-01 Opening To Midnight Thursday - Saturday Condition 2 of this permission limited the variation to a 1 year period only. e) Applicant’s Statement • temporary permission first granted in 2000 and renewed in 2001 • trial periods have proved successful and wish planning permission to be granted on a permanent basis • no objections raised to proposal • offer of £3,000 towards town centre improvements fund as proposal relatively minor in scale continued/
48 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
Item 2/08 - EAST/1381/02/VAR continued…..
f) Notifications Sent Replies Expiry 15 0 03-DEC-02
APPRAISAL
1) Amenity of Neighbours Although the application site is the last unit of the key shopping frontage of the Strategic Centre it immediately abuts the secondary frontage and is within an area of predominantly commercial uses. The additional hour of opening Thursdays to Saturdays that has previously been granted for temporary periods has not given rise to additional problems and it is not considered unreasonable that it be made permanent. There are other Class A3 uses within the town centre which have no planning restrictions on hours of opening and Government guidance supports a relaxation of licensing laws to allow later hours of opening.
It is considered that given the location the proposal would not give rise to harm to neighbouring occupiers.
The offer of £3,000 towards the town centre improvements fund is considered an appropriate level given the scale and nature of the use proposed.
2) Consultation Responses None
49 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
2/09 UNIT 3, CHANTRY PLACE, HEADSTONE LANE P/971/03/CFU/TEM Ward: HATCH END
UNRESTRICTED USE OF PREMISES FOR B2 (GENERAL INDUSTRIAL) OR B8 (STORAGE AND DISTRIBUTION) PURPOSES
PHILIP L PRICE for NATIONWIDE ACCIDENT REPAIR
RECOMMENDATION
Plan Nos: 04/03
GRANT permission in accordance with the development described in the application and submitted plans, subject to the following condition(s):
1 Time Limit - Full Permission 2 The approved car parking spaces within the site should be permanently marked out and used for no other purpose at any time without the written permission of the Local Planning Authority: REASON: To ensure the satisfactory provision of parking areas, to safeguard the appearance of the locality and in the interests of highway safety. 3 Refuse Arrangements - Use 4 The premises shall not be used except between 07.30 hours and 18.00 hours Monday to Saturday inclusive and at no times on Sundays and Bank Holidays without the prior permission of the Local Planning Authority: REASON: To safeguard the amenity of neighbouring residents. 5 Noise restriction of plant and machinery INFORMATIVE: 1 Standard Informative 41 - UDP & Deposit Draft UDP Policies & Proposals (EM4, T13), (EM15, T13)
MAIN CONSIDERATIONS 1) Employment Policy 2) Parking 3) Consultation Responses
INFORMATION a) Summary UDP Key Policies: EM4, T13 Deposit UDP Key Policies: EM15, T13 Car Parking Standard: 24 (25) Justified: 24 (25) continued/
50 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
Item 2/09 - P/971/03/CFU continued.....
Provided: 28 Site Area: 0.49ha. Floorspace: 2820m2 Council Interest: None b) Site Description • west side of Headstone Lane on Chantry Place Industrial Estate • occupied by warehouse/industrial building which has been sub-divided by separate planning permissions • northern unit has consent for B2, B8 or for Trade sales of builders merchants • southern unit has consent for B2 use, tied by condition to use by Perry Group plc only because of parking implications • each unit has own car park, northern area has parking for 17 cars • southern unit has parking for 11 cars • commercial vehicle spaces also available c) Proposal Details • permission is sought for unrestricted use of the entire site for B2 (general industrial) or B8 (storage and distribution) purposes d) Relevant History LBH/3500/13 Erection of warehouse and ancillary office GRANTED accommodation for use as storage and 09-NOV-78 distribution depot LBH/26593 Change of use from Warehouse Class X to GRANTED light industrial use Class III 20-DEC-84
EAST/7/93/FUL Change of use: Southern Unit-B1 to B2 or B8; GRANTED Northern Unit-B1 to B2,or B8, or trade sales of 21-APR-93 builders merchants-Sui Generis EAST/453/93/FUL Change of use: Class B1 to B2 (business to GRANTED general industrial) with parking (southern unit) 10-NOV-93 for benefit of Perry Group plc only e) Applicant’s Statement • looking to simplify permitted uses and at the same time remove any condition making a use personal to a particular occupier f) Notifications Sent Replies Expiry 26 Awaited 09-JUL-03
APPRAISAL 1) Employment Policy This site is allocated for B2 and B8 uses in the adopted UDP, and B1, B2 and B8 uses in the Deposit Replacement Plan. The proposed B2 or B8 uses therefore comply with these allocations. continued/
51 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
Item 2/09 - P/971/03/CFU continued.....
2) Parking Parking standards in both the adopted and Deposit Replacement UDP's are met by the on-site provision.
3) Consultation Responses Awaited
52 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
2/10 353 UXBRIDGE ROAD, HATCH END P/975/03/CFU/SS1 Ward: HATCH END
CONTINUED USE AS CAFE/SANDWICH BAR (CLASS A3) ON GROUND FLOOR
MR S ELGIN for MR SAHIN ELGIN
RECOMMENDATION
Plan Nos: Ordnance Survey; SE/01
GRANT permission in accordance with the development described in the application and submitted plans, subject to the following condition(s):
1 Noise and Odour/Fume from Plant and Machinery 2 Restrict Hours on A3 Uses 3 Noise from Music and Amplified Sound INFORMATIVES: 1 The applicant is advised that the illuminated fascia sign requires advertisement consent. 2 Standard Informative 41 - UDP & Deposit Draft UDP Policies & Proposals (S5, T13, E51), (SEM2, T13, EP25)
MAIN CONSIDERATIONS 1) Character and Retail Policy 2) Residential Amenity 3) Parking/Highway Safety 4) Consultation Responses
INFORMATION a) Summary UDP Key Policies: S5, T13, E51 Deposit UDP Key Policies: SEM2, T13, EP25 Town Centre Hatch End Car Parking Standard: 9 (2) Justified: 6 (0) Provided: 0 CCA 58m2 Council Interest None b) Site Description • two storey pitched roof terraced property on southern side of Uxbridge Road, approximately 30m west of the junction with Anselm Road and approximately 270m west of the train station continued/ 53 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
Item 2/10 - P/975/03/CFU continued.....
• parade of shops nos. 339/41-373 Uxbridge Road, two and three storey properties, ground floor commercial units, upper floors mainly residential • service road to front • uses in this parade: sport shop (A1), plumbing/bathroom shop (A1), car parts (A1), estate agents (A2), application premises was launderette (sui generis), hairdresser (A1), textile shop (A1), charity shop (A1), newsagent (A1), furniture shop (A1), take- away (A3), public house (A3): 8 x A1, 2 x A3, 1 x A2, 1 x sui generis • application property flanked by estate agent (A2), and hairdresser (A1) c) Proposal Details • continued use of ground floor as café/sandwich bar • maximum number of staff at the premises at any one time: 5 d) Relevant History None e) Notifications Sent Replies Expiry 49 3 14-JUL-03
Response: Undesirable precedent of unauthorised works/development being given planning consent, too many restaurants/cafes in the area already, increased pressure for parking and traffic problems, noise and odour, loss of retail.
APPRAISAL 1) Character and Retail Policy The premises were not previously in retail (A1) use. No. 353 was a launderette, which is classified as sui generis. The change of use has not therefore resulted in a loss of a retail unit.
An A3 use is usually considered to be an appropriate use in a designated centre, and it is considered that the change of use of the premises from a launderette to a café/restaurant has had a neutral impact on the vitality and viability of the shopping centre as a whole.
2) Residential Amenity A3 uses in parades of shops below residential units on upper floors is not uncommon. Noise and odour emissions can be controlled through conditions, as suggested above.
3) Parking/Highway Safety There is no on-site parking provision. However, in view of the location of the application site within a designated centre and the presence of a service road to the front of the parade of shops, there is no objection to the scheme on grounds of lack of on-site parking provision or highway safety.
4) Consultation Responses All relevant planning issues are addressed in report.
54 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
2/11 42 & 44 HIGH ST, HARROW ON THE HILL P/1017/03/CFU/SS1 Ward: HARROW ON THE HILL
INSTALLATION OF MICROCELL ANTENNA 110mm X 320mm AT HEIGHT OF 6M ON FRONT ELEVATION OF NO.44, WITH FEEDER CABLES TO EQUIPMENT CABINET AT SIDE OF NO.42
LCC UK for ORANGE PERSONAL COMMUNICATION
RECOMMENDATION
Plan Nos: 30/GLN 7421/01; /02; /03; /04
GRANT permission in accordance with the development described in the application and submitted plans, subject to the following condition(s)
1 Time Limit - Full Permission 2 The colour of the equipment cabinet shall be dark green, and the colour of the feeder cables, anti-vandal cowl and antenna shall be black, as specified on the approved plans, or any other colour as agreed by the Local Planning Authority. REASON: In the interest of the character and appearance of the conservation area.
INFORMATIVES 1 Standard Informative 23 - Considerate Contractor Code of Practice 2 Standard Informative 41 - UDP & Deposit Draft UDP Policies & Proposals : (E5, E6, E52, E38); (SD1, D26, SD2, D4, D17)
MAIN CONSIDERATIONS
1 Conservation Area character and appearance 2 Residential amenity 3 Consultation responses
INFORMATION a) Summary
UDP Key Policies: E5, E6, E52, E38 Deposit UDP Key Policies: SD1, D26, SD2, D4, D17 Area of Special Character TPO Conservation Area: Harrow on the Hill Village Council Interest: None
continued/ 55 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
Item 2/11 - P/1017/03/CFU continued….. b) Site Description
• nos. 42 and 44: three-storey pitched roof red/brown facing brick terraced properties with the third floor accommodation partly contained within the roof space • lies on western side of High Street approx. 50m from the junction with West Street; • 42 end of terrace, Short Hill (pedestrian access) along side, linking High Street with West Street; steep slope from High Street down to West Street; • ground floors of 42 and 44: commercial units; residential above; • two burglar alarm boxes and one hanging sign mounted on front wall. • side elevation No.42: door with canopy over, window next to it, two metal doors to electricity/ other utilities meters etc., painted white, rainwater downpipe. c) Proposal Details
• single antenna of 10cm x 30cm and 8cm deep to be fixed to front wall at a height of 6m (measured to centre of antenna) next to second floor window; • proposed colour of antenna: black; • erection of equipment cabinet of 0.65m in depth, 1.25m in width and 1.25m in height to the side of No.42 fronting the pedestrian walkway ‘Short Hill’; • two feeder cables of 1.6cm outer diameter (proposed colour: black) to run from antenna to equipment cabinet: vertically downwards, then along the top of the shopfront, then horizontally across the side elevation for a length of 2.5m at a height of approx. 4.5m, then vertically downwards parallel/ next to the existing rainwater downpipe; • to be sited behind dwarf wall with railings and between window next to door and the two white painted doors to utilities meters etc; • proposed colour: midnight green (BS); • an anti-vandal cowl of 10cm in width would be fixed to the wall to encase the feeder cables, to a height of 2m above the cabinet. d) Relevant History
None e) Applicant’s Statement
• proposed installations comply with ICNIRP guidelines; • feeder cable above shopfront would be obscured by it and not be visible from road; • the area is a conservation area with restricted opportunity for telecoms installations, and the proposed design was felt to be the least intrusive; • the cabinet would be located off the High Street at the side of the end terrace and not be visible from the highway; • the microcell antenna is incorporated within a shroud to resemble a burglar alarm box; continued/
56 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
Item 2/11 - P/1017/03/CFU continued…..
• the area has been searched extensively but there are no other more suitable locations available which comply with Planning Policy; • although it is the Provider’s preference to utilise macro installations that fulfil all of an area’s coverage requirements, the search was unable to find a single suitable site, and this microcell, in conjunction with the other which was the subject of a previous Licence Notification, are the only possible way of gaining coverage within the area as unobtrusively as possible; • the precise location was carefully selected to ensure that there are no detrimental effects on the visual aspect of the area and the side location of the cabinet would reduce any further possible intrusion; • proposal complies with National Guidance and Local Plan Policy; • the proposed site is compliant with all current health and safety legislation and consequently does not constitute a serious risk to amenity in the neighbouring residential areas. f) Consultations
CAAC: c The surface cabling is intrusive and the box on the elevation fronting Short Hill will be visible.
Advertisement Character of Conservation Area Expiry 10-JUL-03
Notifications Sent Replies Expiry 9 98 02-JUL-03
Response: Health hazard, unsightly, unattractive and bulky cabinet, a 6m high mast would have an adverse impact on the conservation area, not in line with historic character of the area, antenna is of inappropriate scale, contrary to Council's policy in respect of minimum Street Furniture, worry and stress from perceived health risk, affects the "Right of peaceful enjoyment of ones possessions" (Human Rights Act 1998), undesirable precedent, antenna next to bedrooms poses health risk, proximity to school and health risk to children, resulting clutter would be detrimental to the visual amenities in the area, location of installation not in line with recommendations of the Steward report, antenna inappropriate next to a listed building, adverse impact on value of properties.
APPRAISAL
1) Conservation area character and appearance
The proposed antenna and feeder cables are of a modest scale. The antenna would look similar to a burglar alarm box. The antenna and feeder cables would be viewed against the building’s dark red/brown brickwork, and neither the antenna nor the feeder cables would appear prominent or obtrusive. continued/
57 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
Item 2/11 - P/1017/03/CFU continued…..
The equipment cabinet would be 1.25m wide, 1.25m high and 0.65m deep, and it would be sited to the side of No.42, facing Short Hill. The proposed colour is a dark green. Whilst it would be visible for pedestrians using Short Hill, its colour and size would be appropriate, and viewed against the dark red/ brown brickwork, it would not appear obtrusive.
It is considered that, overall, the proposal would preserve the character and appearance of this part of the conservation area, and would not affect the setting of the adjacent Grade II Listed building.
2) Residential amenity
The proposed antenna, feeder cables and equipment cabinet are so designed and would be placed in a position that they would not be visually obtrusive. The outlook from any nearby residential properties would not be affected.
Central Government requires Local Planning Authorities to assess only the visual impact of proposed telecoms installations, provided that the proposal complies with ICNIRP Guidelines which address radiation and health issues. Compliance has been confirmed in writing.
3) Consultation Responses
All relevant planning issues are addressed in the report.
58 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
2/12 447/449 ALEXANDRA AVENUE, SOUTH HARROW P/949/03/CFU/GM Ward: RAYNERS LANE
TWO STOREY AND FIRST FLOOR REAR EXTENSIONS
ROGER BRIDGE FOR MOSSDYP LTD
RECOMMENDATION
Plan Nos: 681/13A; 14A; 15; 16; 17; 18; 19; 20; 5 x A3 sheets of photomontages
GRANT permission in accordance with the development described in the application and submitted plans, subject to the following condition(s):
1 Time Limit - Full Permission 2 Disabled Access - Buildings 3 Fume Extraction - External Appearance - Buildings 4 Noise from Music and Amplified Sound 5 Noise and Odour/Fume from Plant and Machinery 6 The development hereby permitted shall not be occupied until the car parking, turning and loading area(s) shown on the approved plan number(s) 681/15 have been constructed and surfaced with impervious materials, and drained in accordance with details submitted to, and approved in writing by, the local planning authority. The car parking spaces shall be permanently marked out and used for no other purpose, at any time, without the written permission of the local planning authority. REASON: To ensure the satisfactory provision of parking areas, to safeguard the appearance of the locality and in the interests of highway safety. 7 The first floor office building hereby approved shall not be used outside the following times:- 08:00 hours to 20:00 hours, Monday to Saturday inclusive REASON: To safeguard the amenity of neighbouring residents. INFORMATIVES: 1 Standard Informative 19 - Flank Windows 2 Standard Informative 20 - Encroachment 3 Standard Informative 23 - Considerate Contractor Code of Practice 4 Standard Informative 27 - Access for All 5 Standard Informative 32 - The Party Wall etc. Act 1996 6 Standard Informative 35 - CDM Regulations 1994 7 Standard Informative 41 - UDP & Deposit Draft UDP Policies & Proposals (E6, E46, E51, EM3, EM7 (Revised), T13), (SD1, EP25, D4, D7, T13, EM23)
continued/
59 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
Item 2/12 - P/949/03/CFU continued.....
MAIN CONSIDERATIONS 1) Visual and Residential Amenity 2) Employment Policy 3) Parking 4) Accessibility 5) Consultation Responses
INFORMATION a) Summary UDP Key Policies: E6, E46, E51, EM3, EM7 (Revised), T13 Deposit UDP Key Policies: SD1, EP25, D4, D7, T13, EM23 Town Centre Rayners Lane Car Parking Standard: 4 additional (0) Justified: 4 additional (no additional, see report) Provided: No additional, see report Site Area: 0.05ha Floorspace: 89m2 Council Interest: None b) Site Description • terraced unit, two storey at street frontage, three storey at rear due to change in levels, on western side of Alexandra Avenue • within key retail frontage of Rayners Lane District Centre • use comprises restaurant (A3) on ground floor, associated office use (B1) on lower ground floor and 2 self contained flats on first floor • rear yard providing 9 parking spaces and with external staircase to upper floors • rear service road c) Proposal Details • two storey infill rear extension adjacent to no.451 comprising w.c. and office floorspace • first floor rear extension on columns, incorporating existing external staircase, providing new office floorspace • 4 parking spaces beneath new building • internal alterations to provide enlarged restaurant area on ground floor d) Relevant History The site has a long planning history. The most recent relevant application are as follows:- WEST/45600/92/FUL Change of use: Class A1 to A3 (retail to GRANTED restaurant) for use as extension to 12-JAN-93 restaurant at 447 Alexandra Avenue WEST/136/94/FUL Change of use of basement: Class A3 to PERMITTED B1 (ancillary storage to ancillary offices) DEVELOPMENT
continued/ 60 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
Item 2/12 - P/949/03/CFU continued..... e) Applicant’s Statement • proposal involves small increase to restaurant size to allow the number of covers to be maintained whilst facilitating a new wider servery counter • proposed rear office extension maintains existing access to flats and leaves ample clearance to rear of no.2 High Worple • no windows in rear elevation to ensure no risk of overlooking of adjacent gardens • existing parking spaces are undersized, have inadequate manoeuvring space and restrict access to no. 449. Revised layout addresses these problems albeit with the loss of some car parking • steel frame proposal allows for quick solution to need for more office space. It would be modern, lightweight and energy efficient with the mechanical plant hidden from view • proposal is for existing occupier SME Ltd. who are an expanding franchisee including KFC and Pizza Hut f) Notifications Sent Replies Expiry 17 0 16-JUL-03
APPRAISAL
1) Visual and Residential Amenity The proposal is for an unashamed modern extension to the rear of the building to provide additional office space for the existing occupier. At the same time an existing lightwell would be infilled to provide improved facilities for the restaurant at ground floor level. The rear extension would take a different form to the various brick extensions in the locality but would be appropriate for the site. The curved roof would serve to reduce the apparent bulk and there would be an acceptable visual impact from adjoining properties. It is considered that there would be no overdominating/overbearing impact. The use of energy efficient materials and solar panels is to be welcomed
The access to the first floor flats would be maintained and the windows would not be obscured. Due to the change in levels at the rear of the site the flats would be one floor above the extension. There would be no impact on adjoining residential flats for similar reasons. At the rear the absence of rear facing windows would prevent overlooking of the rear gardens of no. 2 High Worple and nos. 1/1a Worple Way.
In the above circumstances it is considered that there would be no detrimental impact on visual and residential amenity. continued/
61 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
Item 2/12 - P/949/03/CFU continued.....
2) Employment Policy The proposal would assist an existing employer in the Borough, would be within a District Centre and would not have an adverse impact on adjoining occupiers. As a consequence it is considered that it would be in accordance with the Council's employment policies.
3) Parking Whilst there would be a loss of existing parking, rather than an increase for the new office floorspace, the site lies within a District Centre where there is good public transport accessibility and public parking provision on a pay and display basis. The revised UDP would also not require additional parking as the standard is based on site area (which does not change as part of the proposal) rather than floorspace.
It is not considered that a parking reason for refusal could be reasonably justified.
4) Accessibility A planning condition and informative are proposed to ensure satisfactory accessibility for the new development.
5) Consultation Responses None.
62 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
2/13 118 STANMORE HILL, STANMORE P/10/03/CFU/SS1 Ward: STANMORE PARK
TWO STOREY FRONT EXTENSION TO PROVIDE GARAGE WITH LIVING ACCOMMODATION OVER
MGM ASSOCIATES FOR MR & MRS A GOLDMAN
RECOMMENDATION
Plan Nos: 9910/P10; 9910/P11; 9910/SP02; 9910/SP01
GRANT permission in accordance with the development described in the application and submitted plans, subject to the following condition(s)
1 Time Limit - Full Permission 2 Materials to Match 3 The use of the extension hereby permitted shall be ancillary to the main dwellinghouse. REASON: To ensure a satisfactory standard of development.
INFORMATIVES 1 Standard Informative 23 - Considerate Contractor Code of Practice 2 Standard Informative 41 - UDP & Deposit Draft UDP Policies & Proposals : (E1, E2, E4, E6, E10, E48); (SD1, SEP5, SEP6, D4, D5, EP33, EP34)
MAIN CONSIDERATIONS
1) Character and appearance 2) Green Belt Policy 3) Residential amenity 4) Consultation responses
INFORMATION a) Summary
UDP Key Policies: E1, E2, E4, E6, E10, E48 Deposit UDP Key Policies: SD1, SEP5, SEP6, D4, D5, EP33, EP34 Area of Special Character Green Belt Council Interest: None
continued/ 63 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
Item 2/13 - P/10/03/CFU continued….. b) Site Description
• detached dwellinghouse set in extensive plot on eastern side of Stanmore Hill, approx. 69m south of the junction with Wood Lane; • located within Green Belt; • outside Little Common Conservation Area; • listed front boundary wall: Grade II listed; • mature boundary vegetation; • land slopes down from north to south. c) Proposal Details
• erection of a single-storey pitched-roof front extension with first floor accommodation provided in the roof space, with dormer windows; • materials to match existing house; • ground floor to accommodate a single garage with storage space and a small kitchen and stairs leading upstairs to the first floor; • first floor: bed/living room and shower room; • living accommodation intended for Maid/ helper; • garage up-and-over door and door to living accommodation in side/ north elevation d) Relevant History
LBH/37183 Single-Storey Side To Rear Extension And Roof GRANTED Alterations At Side, Front And Rear 05-JAN-89
e) 1st Notification Sent Replies Expiry 21 0 20-FEB-03
2nd Notification Sent Replies Expiry 21 0 28-JUL-03
APPRAISAL
2) Character and appearance
The design of the extension, including the dormer windows, reflects the design of the existing house, in particular the integral garage with pitched roof, which also projects forward of the front wall of the main body of the dwellinghouse.
It would be sited away from the listed wall, and therefore given this fact and its design, would not have a detrimental impact on the setting of the listed wall. continued/
64 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
Item 2/13 - P/10/03/CFU continued…..
The impact on the street scene would be negligible, as the house is set well back from the highway, behind a high front boundary wall.
3) Green Belt Policy
The proposed extension would result in an increase in floor area and volume which would, generally, be acceptable in a Green Belt location. A store room had been demolished to make way for the previous extension.
Floor area Volume Original building 331 m 1133 m Existing building 340 m 1199 m Proposed building 417 m 1455 m Percentage increase 26% 28.4 %
It is considered that the increase in floor area and volume would not be disproportionate, and the proposed extension would not be harmful to the openness of this part of the Green Belt.
4) Residential amenity
The proposed extension would be sited approx. 16 m from the southern and northern boundaries of the site. To the north, it would mainly be obscured by the existing forward projection.
The front of No.116 to the south of the application property is currently overlooked by a south-facing balcony and patio doors. The proposed extension would allow increased, but no new overlooking of the front of No.116. It is considered that the increase in overlooking would not be unacceptable such as to justify the withholding of permission.
Due to the existing boundary vegetation and the distance of the proposed extension to the boundary, it is considered that the development would not appear overbearing to the occupiers of No. 116 Stanmore Hill, despite the drop in levels.
5) Consultation Responses
None.
65 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
2/14 19 LAKE VIEW, EDGWARE P/654/03/CFU/SS1 Ward: CANONS
PROVISION OF SATELLITE DISH ON SIDE ELEVATION
S A SILVERMAN
RECOMMENDATION
Plan Nos: Rear and Side Elevations
GRANT permission in accordance with the development described in the application and submitted plans, subject to the following condition(s):
1 Time Limit - Full Permission INFORMATIVE: 1 Standard Informative 41 - UDP & Deposit Draft UDP Policies & Proposals (E5, E6, E38, E45), (SD1, SD2, D4, D5, D17)
MAIN CONSIDERATIONS 1) Conservation Area Character and Appearance 2) Residential Amenity 3) Consultation Responses
INFORMATION a) Summary UDP Key Policies: E5, E6, E38, E45 Deposit UDP Key Policies: SD1, SD2, D4, D5, D17 Conservation Area: Canons Park Estate Council Interest: None b) Site Description • west side of Lake View within Canons Park Estate Conservation Area • semi-detached house c) Proposal Details • installation of satellite dish on flank wall • 45cm diameter, sited on a steel bracket • dish would be approximately 6m above ground level just below the eaves of the hipped roof of the two storey rearward projection, 0.4m from rear wall and 9m from front
continued/
66 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
Item 2/14 - P/654/03/CFU continued..... d) Relevant History None e) Consultations CAAC: Awaited
Advertisement Character of Conservation Area Expiry 17-JUL-03
Notifications Sent Replies Expiry 5 1 04-JUL-03
Response: detrimental to visual amenity
APPRAISAL
1) Conservation Area Character and Appearance Due to the small size of the dish and its proposed location towards the rear of the house, its impact on the appearance of the house or streetscene would be minimal. It is not considered that it would be in a prominent position, and therefore it would not conflict with Policy 12 of the Conservation Area policy statement.
It is considered that the character and appearance of this part of the conservation area would be preserved.
2) Residential Amenity The dish would face a gable end flank wall at no.17, in which there is only one small window towards the front of the house which does not appear to be to a habitable room. The proposed dish would not have a detrimental effect on the outlook or amenity of the occupiers of the neighbouring property.
4) Consultation Responses Addressed in report.
67 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
2/15 5 LITTLE COMMON, STANMORE P/669/03/CFU/SS1 Ward: STANMORE PARK PROVISION OF SATELLITE DISH ON ROOF, REPLACEMENT GARAGE DOOR AND GATE AT SIDE OF BUILDING.
JUDITH CLARE GOTTLER 2/16 5 LITTLE COMMON, STANMORE P/670/03/CLB/AB Ward: STANMORE PARK LISTED BUILDING CONSENT: INSTALLATION OF A SATELLITE DISH
JUDITH CLARE GOTTLER
P/669/03/CFU
RECOMMENDATION
Plan Nos: Elevation Drawings and Roof Plan received 19-MAY-03
GRANT permission in accordance with the development described in the application and submitted plans, subject to the following condition(s):
1 Time Limit - Full Permission 2 Materials to be Approved INFORMATIVE: 1 Standard Informative 41 - UDP & Deposit Draft UDP Policies & Proposals (E6, E7, E45, E34, E38, E4, E2, E1, E10), (SD1, SD2, D4, D5, D12, D17, SEP6, EP33, E32)
P/670/03/CLB
RECOMMENDATION
Plan Nos: 2 photos of roof, undated annotated site plan, letters dated 07-APR-03 & 26- MAR-03 from David Glotter
GRANT Listed Building Consent in accordance with the works described in the application and submitted plans, subject to the following condition(s):
1 Time Limit - Listed Bldg./Cons. Area Consent INFORMATIVES 1 Standard Informative 23 - Considerate Contractor Code of Practice 2 Standard Informative 41 - UDP & Deposit Draft UDP Policies & Proposals (E34), (D12) ______continued/ 68 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
Items 2/15 & 2/16 - P/669/03/CFU & P/670/03/CLB continued.....
MAIN CONSIDERATIONS
1) Listed Building and Conservation Area Character and Appearance 2) Green Belt Policy 3) Consultation Responses
INFORMATION a) Summary
UDP Key Policies: E6, E7, E45, E34, E38, E4, E2, E1, E10 Deposit UDP Key Policies: SD1, SD2, D4, D5, D12, D17, SEP6, EP33, E32 Area of Special Character Grade II Listed Building Conservation Area: Little Common, Stanmore Green Belt Council Interest: None b) Site Description
• two storey dwellinghouse • detached single garage to rear, accessible via road running to the north east of the property and enabling access to nos. 9 and 10 Little Common • metal gate of approximately 1.8m in height between detached garage and house • garage door white horizontal-rib up and over bb) Listed Building Description
• late C18 or earlier house of two storeys which is sited at right angles to the road • of three bays with central door and blind window over • red brick with tile roof, double pitched • gauged flat arches to openings and later shutters to some windows • two storey outbuildings to rear with casement windows and tiled roof • formerly a bakery c) Proposal Details
• replacement timber gate of similar height as existing • replacement up and over vertical-rib white garage door • black satellite dish of 0.65m in diameter to be fixed to base of chimney stack, partly behind parapet wall continued/
69 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
Items 2/15 & 2/16 - P/669/03/CFU & P/670/03/CLB continued..... d) Relevant History
None
P/669/03/CFU e) Consultations
CAAC: No objections to garage doors and gate. Satellite dish is visible and should be hidden in the garden or behind the chimney
Advertisement Character of Conservation Area Expiry 03-JUL-03
Notifications Sent Replies Expiry 5 0 25-JUN-03
P/670/03/CLB
Advertisement Extension of Listed Building Expiry 29-MAY-03
Notifications Sent Replies Expiry 6 0 20-MAY-03
APPRAISAL
1) Listed Building and Conservation Area Character and Appearance
The proposed satellite dish would be small and black and would be located within a valley at the base of the chimney. It would therefore not be visible in views of the listed building and is therefore considered to be acceptable in terms of the character of the listed building and that of the wider conservation area.
The proposed side gate would replace an existing modern metal gate. The proposed simple timber gate would appropriately complement the semi-rural character of the conservation area and the vernacular style of the listed cottage.
The garage is a modern building, built in 1948. The existing garage door is a white “up and over” metal door which is in poor repair. The proposed replacement door would be white GRP which would be very similar to the existing. Therefore it is considered that this would not affect the special character of the listed building and that it would preserve the character of the conservation area.
continued/
70 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
Items 2/15 & 2/16 - P/669/03/CFU & P/670/03/CLB continued.....
2) Green Belt Policy
It is considered that the replacement garage door, the replacement gate and the proposed satellite dish would not have an impact on the openness of the designated Green Belt.
3) Consultation Responses
Addressed in report.
71 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
2/17 KERRY HOUSE, 15 KERRY AVENUE, STANMORE P/567/03/CFU/RJS Ward: CANONS
SUMMERHOUSE IN REAR GARDEN
PHILIP NASH GARDEN DESIGN for MR & MRS DAVIS
RECOMMENDATION
Plan Nos: O/S, A4 Location Plan, Stan 01A, Stan 05A
GRANT permission in accordance with the development described in the application and submitted plans, subject to the following condition(s):
1 Time Limit - Full Permission 2 The development hereby permitted shall not commence until samples of the materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces noted below have been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the local planning authority: (a) the extension/building(s) The development shall be completed in accordance with the approved details and shall thereafter be retained. REASON: To safeguard the appearance of the locality. INFORMATIVES 1 Standard Informative 23 - Considerate Contractor Code of Practice 2 Standard Informative 41 - UDP & Deposit Draft UDP Policies & Proposals (E5, E6, E38, E45, E51), (SD1, SD2, D4, D16)
MAIN CONSIDERATIONS 1) Conservation Area Character and Appearance 2) Residential Amenity 3) Consultation Response
INFORMATION a) Summary UDP Key Policies: E5, E6, E38, E45, E51 Deposit UDP Key Policies: SD1, SD2, D4, D16 Conservation Area: Kerry Avenue TPO Council Interest: None b) Site Description • a large residential property located on the western side of Kerry Avenue • the site has recently been developed with a detached two and three storey dwelling continued/
72 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
Item 2/17 - P/567/03/CFU continued.....
• the property lies within the Kerry Avenue Conservation Area • to the rear south west corner, the boundary treatment consists of 1.8m close boarded wooden paling fencing • the neighbouring properties abutting this rear corner have dense trees and vegetation along their rear boundaries c) Proposal Details • development of a summerhouse to be sited to the south west rear corner of the property • the summerhouse would have a footprint of 3.6 x 3.05m • with a pitched roof the overall height would be 2.4m, with a height of 1.78m to the eaves line • the brochure supplied with the application appears to indicate that the summerhouse would be constructed of timber, however this is not expressly stated d) Relevant History EAST/135/00/FUL Two and three storey house with single storey GRANTED rear swimming pool extension, garages and 08-JUN-2000 parking e) Consultations CAAC: No objections
Advertisement Character of Conservation Area Expiry 03-JUL-03
Notifications Sent Replies Expiry 5 0 24-JUN-03
APPRAISAL
1) Conservation Area Character and Appearance Although the proposed summerhouse is of a reasonable size, it is sited to the rear of the property and would not be visible from the frontage of the site. Accordingly the summerhouse would have no impact in the streetscene, and given its limited size and location, no detrimental impact on the character and appearance of the conservation area.
2) Residential Amenity The summerhouse would not cause any detrimental impact due to the separation distance between it and nearby dwellings and due to the extensive screening trees and vegetation located along the rear boundaries of neighbouring properties.
3) Consultation Responses None
73 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
2/18 16 BEDE CLOSE, PINNER P/164/03/CFU/SS1 Ward: HATCH END
FIRST FLOOR AND SINGLE STOREY REAR EXTENSIONS
THE OXFORD BUILDING DESIGN STUDIO for MR & MRS T STEELE
RECOMMENDATION
Plan Nos: 1043/PL100
GRANT permission in accordance with the development described in the application and submitted plans, subject to the following condition(s):
1 Time Limit - Full Permission 2 The development hereby permitted shall not commence until samples of the materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces noted below have been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the local planning authority: (a) the extension (b) the conservatory The development shall be completed in accordance with the approved details and shall thereafter be retained. REASON: To safeguard the appearance of the locality. 3 Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any order revoking and re-enacting that order with or without modification), no window(s)/door(s) shall be installed in the eastern or western wall(s) of the development hereby permitted without the prior permission in writing of the local planning authority. REASON: To safeguard the amenity of neighbouring residents.
INFORMATIVES: 1 Standard Informative 20 - Encroachment 2 Standard Informative 23 - Considerate Contractor Code of Practice 3 Standard Informative 41 - UDP & Deposit Draft UDP Policies & Proposals (E5, E6, E38, E45), (SD1, SD2, D4, D5, D17)
MAIN CONSIDERATIONS
1) Conservation Area Character 2) Residential Amenity 3) Consultation Responses ______
continued/
74 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
Item 2/18 - P/164/03/CFU continued.....
INFORMATION
This application was deferred at the meeting of the Development Control Committee on 9th July for a Members Site Visit which took place on 21st July. a) Summary
UDP Key Policies: E5, E6, E38, E45 Deposit UDP Key Policies: SD1, SD2, D4, D5, D17 Conservation Area: Pinnerwood Park Estate Council Interest: None b) Site Description
• semi-detached property located on horseshoe-bend of Bede Close • to west, back gardens of properties on Linkway • two storey side and single storey rear extension built • single storey rear extension (2.1m deep x 3.6m wide) erected away from the boundary with the other half of the semi-detached, distance to boundary 7m • building staggered at rear • abutting dwelling also extended to rear, flat roof single storey extension built right up to mutual boundary c) Proposal Details
• first floor gable end rear extension over existing single storey rear extension • single storey extension and conservatory across the remaining width of the dwelling, rear wall flush with the rear wall of the existing single storey rear extension, filling in the gap to the rear extension of the adjoining property • towards the adjoining property, the extension would be 3m deep, as the application property is staggered at the rear • both extension and conservatory style element have lean-to roofs • brick wall to the adjoining property d) Relevant History
WEST/625/97 Two storey side and single storey rear REFUSED extension 01-DEC-97
Reasons for refusal: "1. The proposed side extension would represent an unduly large and obtrusive addition to the dwelling which would be damaging to the symmetry of this pair of semi-detached dwellings and upset the proportions of the original building. The overall effect would be harmful to the character and appearance of this part of the Conservation Area, contrary to UDP policy.
continued/ 75 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
Item 2/18 - P/164/03/CFU continued.....
2. The proposed side extension would encroach excessively into the open space surrounding the property, detracting from the layout and form of Bede Close and increasing unacceptably the visual dominance of built development. This would be harmful to the character and appearance of this part of the Conservation Area, contrary to UDP policy." Appeal Allowed 23-MAR-98
WEST/649/98/FUL Replacement timber frame windows in front GRANTED and side elevations 08-DEC-98
e) Consultations
CAAC: The building has already been considerably extended and these proposals would make it even larger and over dominant in relation to the original building. It will also increase the imbalance in the symmetry with the adjacent part of the semi.
Advertisement Character of Conservation Area Expiry 27-MAR-03
Notifications Sent Replies Expiry 7 0 14-MAR-03
APPRAISAL
1) Conservation Area Character
The proposed extensions are of a simple design, reflecting design elements of the existing building. The only part that would be visible from any public viewpoints would be the side of the modest first floor extension. However, it is not considered that this would be obtrusive and it is considered that the proposed scheme is acceptable. It would preserve the character and appearance of the conservation area.
2) Residential Amenity
The proposed single storey extension would be almost flush with the rear wall of the extension to the adjoining property, and the first floor extension would be erected away from the boundary. Therefore, there would be no loss of light to the adjoining property.
The neighbouring properties to the west are located at a distance of over 31m from the application property, and there would be no issues in respect of loss of light. continued/
76 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
Item 2/18 - P/164/03/CFU continued.....
A condition is suggested to control the insertion of windows in the flank elevations of the first floor extension in order to prevent any direct overlooking of adjoining gardens and the associated loss of privacy.
The proposed scheme would not have any materially adverse impacts on the residential amenities of the occupiers of adjoining properties.
3) Consultation Responses
Addressed in report.
77 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
2/19 72 SILVERSTON WAY, STANMORE P/110/03/CFU/TW Ward: BELMONT SINGLE STOREY REAR AND TWO STOREY SIDE EXTENSIONS
S D JOHNSTON for MR VASSA
RECOMMENDATION
Plan Nos: SDJ/105/2F, SDJ/105/4D
GRANT permission in accordance with the development described in the application and submitted plans, subject to the following condition(s):
1 Time Limit - Full Permission 2 Materials to Match 3 Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any order revoking and re-enacting that order with or without modification), no window(s)/door(s) shall be installed in the flank wall(s) of the development hereby permitted without the prior permission in writing of the local planning authority. REASON: To safeguard the amenity of neighbouring residents. INFORMATIVES: 1 Standard Informative 23 - Considerate Contractor Code of Practice 2 Standard Informative 32 - The Party Wall etc. Act 1996 3 Standard Informative 41 - UDP & Deposit Draft UDP Policies & Proposals (E6, E45), (SD1, D4, D5)
MAIN CONSIDERATIONS
1) Character of the Area 2) Amenity of Neighbours 3) Consultation Responses
INFORMATION
This application was deferred at the meeting of the Development Control Committee on 9th July for a Members Site Visit which took place on 21st July. a) Summary
UDP Key Policies: E6, E45 Deposit UDP Key Policies: SD1, D4, D5 Site Area: 0.08ha. Council Interest: None
continued/ 78 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
Item 2/19 - P/110/03/CFU continued..... b) Site Description
• two storey semi-detached house on the southern side of Silverston Way, approximately 150m from the junction with Marsh Lane • Silverston Way is made up of similarly styled houses, mostly semi-detached but with a small number of detached houses • many of the houses have been extended at the side c) Proposal Details
• single storey front extension with a lean-to roof, projecting forwards in line with the existing bay • two storey side extension which would be set back by 1m from the main front wall of the house and would have a lower hipped roof than the existing house • single storey rear extension of 3m depth for the full width of the plot d) Relevant History
None e) Consultations Sent Replies Expiry 3 2 12-MAR-03
Response: Loss of light, no objection to rear extension, needs revision to comply with guidelines.
APPRAISAL
1) Character of the Area
The locality is made up of mostly semi-detached and some detached two storey houses, many of which have been extended.
The proposal has been revised to take account of the Councils Supplementary Planning Guidance and therefore takes account of the effects of the proposal on the streetscene and the area. It is considered that the proposal complies with Supplementary Planning Guidance and would have no detrimental impact on the character of the area.
continued/
79 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
Item 2/19 - P/110/03/CFU continued.....
2) Amenity of Neighbours
The proposed single storey rear element would be 3m in depth adjacent to the neighbours boundary. The proposal complies with SPG in this regard and would have an acceptable impact on the amenity of neighbours.
The detached property to the west, no.70, has a landing window, a wc window and a half glazed door in the side elevation, facing no.72. None of these are 'protected' windows as defined in the SPG. Furthermore the side door is to the kitchen which is lit by a rearward facing window which would remain unaffected by the proposal. It is therefore concluded that a reason for refusal in this regard could not be sustained.
3) Consultation Responses
Concerns raised are dealt with above.
80 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
2/20 44 DENNIS LANE, STANMORE P/966/03/CFU/AMH Ward: CANONS
DEMOLITION OF BUNGALOW, ERECTION OF DETACHED HOUSE
ROBIN BRETHERICK ASSOCIATES FOR MR & MRS R FISHER
RECOMMENDATION
Plan Nos: 03-06/100, 101, 102, 103, 104
GRANT permission in accordance with the development described in the application and submitted plans, subject to the following condition(s)
1 Time Limit - Full Permission 2 The development hereby permitted shall not commence until samples of the materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces noted below have been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the local planning authority: (a) the extension/building(s) (b) the ground surfacing (c) the boundary treatment The development shall be completed in accordance with the approved details and shall thereafter be retained. REASON: To safeguard the appearance of the locality. 3 PD Restriction – Classes A to E 4 The window(s) in the first floor flank wall(s) of the proposed development shall: (a) be of purpose-made obscure glass, (b) be permanently fixed closed below a height of 1.8m above finished floor level, and shall thereafter be retained in that form. REASON: To safeguard the amenity of neighbouring residents. 5 Parking for Occupants – Garages 6 Disabled Access – Buildings
INFORMATIVES 1 Standard Informative 20 – Encroachment 2 Standard Informative 23 - Considerate Contractor Code of Practice 3 Standard Informative 32 - The Party Wall etc Act 1996 4 Standard Informative 36 – Measurements from Submitted Plans 5 Standard Informative 41 - UDP & Deposit Draft UDP Policies & Proposals : (E6, E17, E45, T13); (D4, D5, SD1, EP42, T13) 6 Standard Informative 27 - Access for All
continued/
81 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
Item 2/20 - P/966/03/CFU continued…..
MAIN CONSIDERATIONS
1) Green Belt/Area of Special Character 2) Neighbouring Occupiers 3) Appearance in Streetscene 4) Consultation Responses
INFORMATION
Details of this application are reported to Committee at the request of a nominated member. a) Summary
UDP Key Policies: E6, E17, E45, T13 Deposit UDP Key Policies: D4, D5, SD1, EP42, T13 TPO Council Interest: None b) Site Description
• site to eastern side of Dennis Lane, occupied by detached bungalow . • site backs on to Green Belt and Area of Special Character, but does not lie within these areas. • site with TPO covering protecting all trees in situ since 1962. • adjacent site to north contains large detached bungalow, with footprint approximately double that of the bungalow on the application site. • adjacent site to south contains two flats within 2-storey purpose built block. c) Proposal Details
• application proposes demolition of existing bungalow, and the construction of detached house, with integrated double garage. The new dwelling would straddle the footprint of the existing bungalow. • main footprint of new dwelling would measure 13.5m by 12m. Dwelling would be in a ‘c’ shape with two 2-storey rear projections on opposite sides of the dwelling. • two single storey sections to rear would continue the 2-storey projections - one to northern side of rear elevation 4m deep by 5m wide, and one to southern side of rear elevation 1m deep and 5m wide. • the roof would be pitched, with subordinate elements for the 2 storey rear sections. The single storey rear sections would have pitched roofs above. • a bay window with gable above is proposed for the centre of the front elevation. d) Relevant History
None. continued/
82 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
Item 2/20 - P/966/03/CFU continued…..
e) Notifications Sent Replies Expiry 4 1 05-JUN-03
Response: Loss of light; size and scale; character.
APPRAISAL
1) Green Belt / Area of Special Character
Given the close proximity of the application site to the Green Belt and an Area of Special Character (running to the east of, but not including the application site) the potential impact on these areas is an important consideration.
The application site is very private, surrounded by mature/semi-mature trees and vegetation, the most valuable of which have been protected by a TPO served in 1962. In addition trees exist outside the application site within the AOSC/Green Belt. None of the protected trees would be affected by the proposed development. The trees help to effectively obscure the application site from the AOSC/Green Belt. It is not considered the proposed dwelling would be any more damaging to the area than the existing bungalow, of which the roof is currently visible from the AOSC/Green Belt. The AOSC/Green Belt stretches far beyond the application site and within the section that backs on to Dennis Lane, it can be reasonably expected that at least the extremities of dwellings would be visible.
It is not considered that the proposed development would have a damaging effect on the character of the AOSC or Green Belt.
2) Neighbouring Occupiers
The proposed development complies with the relevant Supplementary Planning Guidance for new development. There are no protected windows on the facing flank wall of adjacent bungalow number 46 to the north, and the proposal would not impact on protected windows to the front or rear of this building.
Number 46 is sited 5m from the proposed house, and an outbuilding and dense boundary vegetation c3-5m high, lie between. Given this separation between properties, and the nature of the boundary treatment, it is not considered that the proposal would significantly impact on the usable rear amenity space of this adjacent dwelling.
Purpose built flats to the south are sited c11m from the application site (excluding single storey garages extending close to the boundary). There are no protected windows on the facing flank wall of this adjacent building, and the proposal would not impact on protected windows to the front or rear of this building. continued/
83 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
Item 2/20 - P/966/03/CFU continued…..
It is not considered that the proposal would lead to any unreasonable overshading or loss of residential amenity for the neighbouring occupiers.
3) Appearance in Streetscene
The immediate surrounding area is characterised primarily by detached properties set back from the street, in large plots of land. Bungalows occupy the three plots to the immediate north of the application site, although beyond this two storey dwellings are more common. Immediately to the south of the application site lies a two storey purpose built block of flats, with a larger block further south. It is not considered that the construction of a two storey dwelling on this site, would introduce a feature at odds with the established character of the surrounding area.
The main part of the proposed dwelling would respect the existing front and rear building lines on this side of Dennis Lane. As such, the replacement house would be sited c19m from the street, in the same way as the adjacent properties.
It is not considered the proposal would be unduly bulky or obtrusive in the street scene or have any unreasonable impact on the character of the Applicant’s property or surrounding area.
4) Amenity Space
The application site is considered large enough to accommodate the proposed development without any adverse impact on rear amenity space. The significant increase in footprint would occur to the rear of the property where a rear garden depth of some 25m would be retained.
5) Consultation Responses
Addressed in report.
84 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
SECTION 3 - OTHER APPLICATIONS RECOMMENDED FOR REFUSAL
3/01 13 VILLAGE WAY EAST, HARROW P/875/03/CFU/SG1 Ward: RAYNERS LANE
CHANGE OF USE: SHOP TO HOT FOOD TAKE AWAY & RESTAURANT (CLASS A1 TO A3) ON GROUND FLOOR, WITH EXTRACTOR DUCTING ON REAR ELEVATION
ANVA LTD FOR MR & MRS CILEK
RECOMMENDATION
Plan Nos: 65.03/01 and site plan
REFUSE permission for the development described in the application and submitted plans for the following reason(s):
1 The proposal would give rise to a concentration of non-retail uses, which would adversely affect the retail character of the centre and undermine the contribution of the secondary retail frontage.
INFORMATIVES 1 Standard Informative 41 - UDP & Deposit Draft UDP Policies & Proposals : (E4, E5, E6, E38, E39, E45); (SD1, SD2, D4, D5, D6, D16, D17, D18)
MAIN CONSIDERATIONS
1) Retail Policy 2) Parking and Highway Considerations 3) Residential Amenity 4) Consultation Responses
INFORMATION a) Summary
UDP Key Policies: E4, E5, E6, E38, E39, E45 Deposit UDP Key Policies: SD1, SD2, D4, D5, D6, D16, D17, D18 Town Centre Rayners Lane CCA: 67.5m2 Car Parking: Standard: 6 (No Additional) Justified: 0 (No Additional) Provided: 0 Council Interest: None continued/
85 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
Item 3/01 - P/875/03/CFU continued….. b) Site Description
• A1 retail unit located in the secondary retail frontage of Rayners lane District Centre. Adjacent to main road, residential units above. • property lies in a parade of 11 units consisting of the following use: Butchers (A1); Car Audio Shop (A1); Lighting Shop (A1); Hairdresser (A1); Model Shop (A1 – permission for A3 use); Insurance Office (A2); Art Shop (A1 - Application Site); Restaurant (A3); Vacant (A3); Glass Shop (A1) (7 x A1 , 3 x A3, 1 x A2) c) Proposal Details
• change of use from shop to hot food take away and restaurant (Class A1 to A3) • it is proposed to install an extraction flue system and make internal alterations d) Relevant History
None. e) Consultations
Environment Agency: Awaited
Notifications Sent Replies Expiry 28 0 12-JUN-03
APPRAISAL
1) Retail Policy
Given the location of the site within a secondary frontage, the relevant policies in considering the proposed change of use are S14 of the adopted UDP and EM18 of the UDP – Revised Deposit Draft, March 2002.
Both of the above policies require that:
The use is appropriate to the town centre – An A3 use is appropriate for this town centre location.
A harmful concentration of non-retail use is not created or added to – The parade has 11 units, consisting of 7 A1 units (including the application site and 2 double A1 units), 1 A2 unit and 3 A3 units. The smaller section of parade in which the unit is situated has 6 units which includes 3 A1 units (including the application site), 1 A2 unit and 2 A3 units. The application site has an A2 unit on one side and 2 A3 units on the other side. In these circumstances, the change of use would therefore result in a continuous row of 4 non-retail units, which would represent a harmful concentration of such uses contrary to the provisions of policy S14. continued/
86 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
Item 3/01 - P/875/03/CFU continued…..
In other respects a window display or other frontage appropriate to the shopping area would be maintained – and were the application acceptable in other respects, this could be controlled by a condition.
In addition the emerging UDP (2002) policies require that: The proposed use is appropriate to a town centre, is primarily for visiting members of the public and requires an accessible location – an A3 is an appropriate use for the location.
The length of the secondary frontage in non-retail use at street level in the centre (including any outstanding permissions) would not exceed 50% of the total – The percentage of non-retail use in the centre, having regard to the statutory UDP is 41.1% and this would increase to 41.92% if the change of use were permitted. With regard to the emerging UDP, the percentage of non-retail use in the centre would increase to 37.78% if the change of use were permitted. The resulting percentage of non-retail use would therefore be well within the 50% policy maximum.
Therefore, although the proposal would not conflict with the percentage requirements of the policy, it would clearly result in a concentration of non-retail uses. Although there are a number of A1 units along the parade, it is necessary to retain a sufficient number of consecutive A1 units to encourage pedestrian activity and movement along the street. For this reason, planning permission should not be granted.
2) Parking and Highway Considerations
In the revised Deposit Draft UDP the parking requirement for an A3 use is the same as for a retail unit. Notwithstanding the lack of any available on site parking, this fact, together with the location of the site within a District Centre justifies this deficiency.
3) Residential Amenity
Although there is residential accommodation above properties in the parade, were the proposal to be acceptable in other respects, conditions could be imposed to take account of noise and fume emissions and hours of use, in order to safeguard the amenities of the occupants.
4) Consultation Responses
None.
87 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
3/02 123 HEADSTONE ROAD, HARROW P/1262/03/CVA/GM Ward: GREENHILL
VARIATION OF CONDITION 10 OF PLANNING PERMISSION EAST/69/02/FUL TO PERMIT ANCILLARY HOT FOOD TAKE- AWAY SALES
DIRECT PLANNING LTD for MR N JAMEEL
RECOMMENDATION
Plan Nos: Site Plan received 04-JUN-03
REFUSE permission for variation described in the application and submitted plans for the following reason(s):
1 Refusal - Parking Insufficient INFORMATIVE: 1 Standard Informative 41 - UDP & Deposit Draft UDP Policies & Proposals (E6, E51, T13), (SD1, EP25, EM26, T13)
MAIN CONSIDERATIONS 1) Parking 2) Retail Policy 3) Residential Amenity 4) Consultation Responses
INFORMATION a) Summary UDP Key Policies: E6, E51, T13 Deposit UDP Key Policies: SD1, EP25, EM26, T13 Council Interest: None b) Site Description • terraced unit with residential use above on eastern side of Headstone Road • close to busy junction with Hindes Road and pedestrian crossing • in use as restaurant (Class A3) c) Proposal Details • variation of condition 10 of planning permission ref: EAST/69/02/FUL to allow ancillary hot food take-away sales
continued/
88 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
Item 3/02 - P/1262/03/CVA continued.....
• condition 10 reads as follows: "Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town & Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987, the permission hereby granted shall not include use for the sale of hot food for consumption off the premises, use as a public house, wine bar or private members club. REASON: To safeguard the amenity of neighbouring residents and in the interests of highway safety." d) Relevant History
LBH/20301 Change of use to take-away hot food shop REFUSED 05-NOV-81
Reason for refusal: "The proposal is unacceptable in that it does not provide car parking space in accordance with the Council's approved standards and will prejudice the free flow of traffic and general highway safety in the vicinity of the Headstone Road/Hindes Road junction."
LBH/21514 Shopfront GRANTED 21-JUN-82
WEST/672/94/FUL Change of use: Class A1 to A3 (retail to fish REFUSED and chip shop) on ground floor 03-FEB-95
Reason for refusal: "Car parking cannot be satisfactorily provided within the curtilage of the site to meet the Council's minimum requirements in respect of the development, and the likely increase in parking on the neighbouring highway(s) would be detrimental to the free flow and safety of traffic on the adjoining highway." A subsequent appeal was dismissed on 03-OCT-95
EAST/637/01/FUL Change of use of part ground floor to GRANTED residential, access and alterations to shopfront 27-JUL-01
EAST/958/01/FUL Change of use from shop to REFUSED takeaway/restaurant (Class A1 to A3) and new 02-NOV-01 shopfront Reason for refusal: "Car parking cannot be satisfactorily provided within the curtilage of the site to meet the Council's minimum requirements in respect of the development, and the likely increase in parking on the neighbouring highways would be detrimental to the free flow and safety of traffic on those highways." continued/
89 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
Item 3/02 - P/1262/03/CVA continued.....
EAST/69/02/FUL Change of use from shop to restaurant (Class GRANTED A1 to A3) and new shopfront 16-APR-02
e) Consultations C.E.H.O. – a night cafe license would be necessary if a take-away service were to be provided after midnight. No food safety issues as no change to layout proposed.
Notifications Sent Replies Expiry 26 0 02-JUL-03
APPRAISAL
1) Parking Changes of use of the premises to a hot food take-away and to a restaurant with take-away use have previously been refused. An appeal in 1995 for a fish and chip shop use was also dismissed. The permission granted in 2002 was justified only on the basis that take-away use was excluded. The concern has always been the specific location close to the junction with Hindes Road. Visitors to take-aways tend not to stay for long periods and are often willing to park injudiciously due to the short nature of their stay. In this location parking spaces are at a premium and it is considered that there would be a detrimental impact on the free flow of traffic and highway safety if the proposal were to be allowed.
2) Retail Policy There would be no conflict with the Council's retail policy, the premises already being within A3 use.
3) Residential Amenity It is not considered that there would be an adverse amenity impact from the proposal. Conditions already control the Class A3 use in terms of hours of use, noise and odours.
4) Consultation Responses These are addressed in the report; additionally road is small and already overdeveloped, this would make matters worse; previously advised that take-away use would not be allowed.
90 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
3/03 LAND ON SOUTH EAST SIDE OF JUNCTION OF P/815/03/COU/TEM MAGPIE HALL ROAD AND HEATHBOURNE ROAD, Ward: STANMORE PARK BUSHEY
OUTLINE: SEVEN PART SINGLE, PART TWO AND PART THREE STOREY HOUSES ELEVATED ABOVE GROUND LEVEL, WITH ACCESS AND PARKING
STUDIO D5 for PIERRETTE GOLETTO
RECOMMENDATION
Plan Nos: 1:1250 Land Registry Plan/Context Site Plan, Site Plan, Proposed Site Plan, Ground Floor Plan, First Floor Plan, Second Floor Plan, (3D-001, 002, 003 - all illustrative)
REFUSE permission for the development described in the application and submitted plans for the following reason(s):
1 The proposals would constitute inappropriate development in the Green Belt, contrary to the provisions of PPG2 and the Harrow Unitary Development Plan, and would give rise to the loss of openness and trees of significant amenity value, to the detriment of the character and appearance of the Green Belt, the appearance of the area and the Area of Special Character. 2 The proposals would provide an unacceptable form of urban development in this semi-rural location, with excessive coverage of buildings and hardsurfacing, to the detriment of the visual amenities of the streetscene and the character of the area. 3 The proposed development, by virtue of its size and siting, would be obtrusive, overbearing and unneighbourly in relation to the adjacent residential properties, and by reason of the substandard amount and form of amenity space would provide an inadequate level of amenities for the intended occupiers. INFORMATIVE: 1 Standard Informative 41 - UDP & Deposit Draft UDP Policies & Proposals (E4, E6, E8, E9 (as amended), E10 (as amended), E27, E45, T13), (SEP5, SD1, SEP6, EP29, EP31, EP32, EP33, D4, D5, T13)
MAIN CONSIDERATIONS 1) Green Belt Policy 2) Appearance and Character of Area 3) Area of Special Character 4) Residential Amenity 5) Parking 6) Consultation Responses ______
continued/
91 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
Item 3/03 - P/815/03/COU continued.....
INFORMATION a) Summary UDP Key Policies: E4, E6, E8, E9 (as amended), E10 (as amended), E27, E45, T13 Deposit UDP Key Policies: SEP5, SD1, SEP6, EP29, EP31, EP32, EP33, D4, D5, T13 Area of Special Character: Green Belt Car Parking Standard: 16 (13) Justified: 16 (13) Provided: 13 minimum Site Area: 1848m2 Habitable Rooms: 42 min. No. of Residential Units: 7 Density: 38 dph, 227 hrph Council Interest: None b) Site Description • south east side of Magpie Hall Road, adjacent to junction with Heathbourne Road, within Green Belt and Area of Special Character • triangle of undeveloped land with mature tree cover, close boarded fence along Magpie Hall Road frontage, chain link fence adjacent to open land to the south within Little Heathfield • row of houses adjacent to south-western boundary of site • detached houses opposite site within Hertsmere B.C. • site covered by woodland TPO which protects all trees on the site c) Proposal Details • outline planning permission sought for the development of 7 houses, siting and means of access to be determined at outline stage • 1 detached house towards north-east corner of site, row of 5 terraced houses to south-west sited 6.5m from rear boundary of site, 1 house sited in front of end- terraced unit within 6.5m of south-western boundary of site • concept plan shows 6 southern houses built on stilts to provide parking beneath building within 2 floors of accommodation over, roof garden on part of top floor • northernmost detached house built at ground level with 2 floors of accommodation over, again with roof garden on part of 2nd floor • new accesses into site shown midway along Magpie Hall Road boundary, and close to south-western boundary to provide separate in-out system • private road proposed between Magpie Hall Road boundary and proposed houses • illustrative axonometric drawings show northernmost house with flat roof, remaining 6 houses with monopitch roofs
continued/
92 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
Item 3/03 - P/815/03/COU continued..... d) Relevant History LBH/37440 Detached house (outline) APPEAL LODGED AGAINST NON- DETERMINATION 20-NOV-89 APPEAL DISMISSED
EAST/707/01/CON Retention of boundary fence to ENFORCEMENT Magpie Hall Road APPEAL ALLOWED 08-JUL-02 e) Applicant’s Statement • majority of trees retained, new and additional trees allowed for • proposed houses to maintain present housing context in terms of type, scale, materials • siting of houses takes into consideration triangular nature of site and views to surrounding landscape • ground floor (beneath houses) landscaped, shared and used by all residents on the site • parking beneath the raised houses, hidden from view, screened from street by landscaping • 2 shared glass enclosed stairwells to access 6 houses • family unit houses of minimum 3 bedrooms, kitchen, dining, study, balcony, roof terrace-garden, 1 private parking space plus 1 visitor parking space • lightweight construction, preferably glass and timber • create modern, self-sustaining development taking into consideration context, landscape, need for balanced housing developments, innovative use of building materials, secure family environment • encompasses new concepts of sustainable housing • would enhance and complement existing local green spaces f) Consultations EA: No comments TWU: No objection Hertsmere B.C.: Objects
Advertisement Departure from Development Plan Expiry 10-JUL-03
Notifications Sent Replies Expiry 7 0 02-JUL-03
continued/
93 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
Item 3/03 - P/815/03/COU continued.....
APPRAISAL
1) Green Belt Policy PPG2 and amended UDP Policy E9 exclude new residential development from the list of uses for which new buildings in the Green Belt may be appropriate. The proposed houses therefore represent inappropriate development in the Green Belt.
In terms of amended Policy E10, the proposals fail against criteria (A), (B), (C) and (E) as discussed in more detail below, but in summary would be detrimental to the character and appearance of the Green Belt.
2) Appearance and Character of Area The proposals would develop a valuable swathe of open land which separates Heathfield Cottages from development in L.B. Hertsmere to the north-east. The loss of openness would be detrimental to the appearance and character of the area.
In addition, the proposed siting of houses and position of the access road and associated hardsurfacing would give rise to the removal of most mature trees on this site which is covered by a TPO. The Woodland Order which relates to this site also protects trees which have grown up since the Order was made, and such younger protected trees would also be removed or threatened.
The design concept of dwellings on stilts in this location would provide an urban form of development, out of keeping with the semi-rural character of the area and one which would be incongruous in the streetscene.
The extent of proposed hardsurfacing to accommodate the access road and parking/turning areas would be visually unattractive, and contrast with the existing verdant character of the land, to the detriment of the appearance of the area.
3) Area of Special Character The proposed development would be intrusive and remove a significant area of undeveloped land which contributes to the character and appearance of this part of the Area of Special Character.
4) Residential Amenity The proposals would locate 3 storey houses within about 5m of the boundary with no.3 Heathfield Cottages, with a significant projection beyond the main rear wall such that the 45o code would be breached. As a result the proposals would be obtrusive, overbearing and unneighbourly.
The submitted plans shows no allocated amenity space for the occupiers of the proposed houses apart from second floor roof gardens, and the area beneath the 6 houses on stilts, which would also in the case of 4 houses be used for car parking. It is considered that these ground-floor areas would be unsuitable for use as amenity space, and that the small roof gardens areas would provide a poor level of amenities for the intended residents. continued/
94 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
Item 3/03 - P/815/03/COU continued.....
5) Parking The layout plan shows 2 open spaces alongside Unit 1, 11 spaces beneath 4 of the houses, with capacity for additional spaces in the access road. It is therefore considered that adequate parking would be provided.
6) Consultation Responses To be completed
95 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
3/04 148 PINNER ROAD, HARROW P/918/03/CFU/TEM Ward: HEADSTONE SOUTH CHANGE OF USE: RETAIL (A1) TO RESTAURANT/BAR (A3) AT GROUND FLOOR, TO BE OPERATED AS PRIVATE MEMBERS CLUB (RE-SUBMISSION)
DIRECT PLANNING LTD for MR S B PATEL
RECOMMENDATION
Plan Nos: DP/495/4-01
REFUSE permission for the development described in the application and submitted plans for the following reason(s):
1 Refusal - Parking Insufficient INFORMATIVE: 1 Standard Informative 41 - UDP & Deposit Draft UDP Policies & Proposals (E51, S16, S17, T13, A4), (EP25, EM21, EM26, T13, C20)
MAIN CONSIDERATIONS 1) Retail Policy 2) Parking and Servicing 3) Residential Amenity 4) Accessibility 5) Consultation Responses
INFORMATION a) Summary UDP Key Policies: E51, S16, S17, T13, A4 Deposit UDP Key Policies: EP25, EM21, EM26, T13, C20 Car Parking Standard: 14 (see report) Justified: 13 (see report) Provided: 3 CCA 87m2 Council Interest: None b) Site Description • western corner of junction of Pinner Road and Oxford Road • occupied by vacant shop on the ground floor with 2 floors of residential accommodation over, accessed via side staircase • parking area for 3 cars at rear of site, adjacent to Oxford Road
continued/
96 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
Item 3/04 - P/918/03/CFU continued..... c) Proposal Details • change of use of ground floor from retail to restaurant/bar (Class A1 to A3), to be operated as a Private Members Club d) Relevant History LBH/41278 Change of use of ground floor from offices GRANTED (Class A2) to shop (Class A1) and snack bar 14-SEP-90 (Class A3)
WEST/1020/02/FUL Change of use: retail (A1) to restaurant/bar REFUSED (A3) at ground floor 16-DEC-02 Reason for refusal: "Car parking cannot be provided within the curtilage of the site to meet the Council's requirements in respect of the development, and the likely increase in parking on the neighbouring highways would be detrimental to the free flow and safety of traffic on the neighbouring highways."
e) Notifications Sent Replies Expiry 35 10 22-MAY-03 Response: On-street parking, noise and disturbance, litter, devaluation, traffic congestion
APPRAISAL
1) Retail Policy The application site is located within a parade of shops which is not in a designated shopping area. Both Adopted Policy S16 and Replacement Policy EM21 state that changes of use from retail shops in such locations will normally be permitted if the proposal would not result in the loss of necessary local retail provision. In this case the site is within a parade of 10 shops, 7 of which would remain in A1 use, maintaining an adequate number of retail units. In terms of criterion (B) of Policy S16, the proposal would add to the vitality of the area, being a use that is more likely to extend into the evening.
2) Parking and Servicing This area is characterised by heavy on-street parking, some of which is illegal and injudicious. In recognition of this, applications for A3 uses (including takeaways) have been refused since 1995 at nos. 126, 140, 150, 152 and 162 Pinner Road because of insufficient on-site parking. It is considered that this proposal would worsen the existing situation and aggravate the existing parking difficulties, especially as the customer circulation area in comparison with the last application for this property has been increased from 66m2 to 87m2.
continued/
97 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
Item 3/04 - P/918/03/CFU continued.....
3) Residential Amenity While there is residential use above the unit this is a common arrangement in relation to proposals for A3 use. It is not considered that a situation harmful to residential amenity necessarily would arise from the scale of the proposals, and were the proposals otherwise acceptable, amenity could be protected by conditions relating to noise, fumes, hours of fuse and the type of A3 use.
4) Accessibility A condition could be imposed to secure access were the proposals otherwise acceptable.
5) Consultation Responses Litter - it is not considered that litter would necessarily be caused by this proposal which does not involve a takeaway use Devaluation - not a planning consideration Other issues discussed in report.
98 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
3/05 16A UXBRIDGE RD, STANMORE P/1078/03/CFU/GM Ward: STANMORE PARK
DEMOLITION OF HOUSE AND REPLACEMENT WITH 4 STOREY BUILDING WITH BASEMENT PARKING TO PROVIDE FOUR FLATS
ARA BLU ARCHITECTS for MR BOWRY.
RECOMMENDATION
Plan Nos: 01011 01; 02; 0131 01; 02; 03; 04; 05; 06
REFUSE permission for the development described in the application and submitted plans for the following reason(s):
1 The proposal would represent a cramped overdevelopment of the site by reason of inadequate space around the building, rear garden depth and usable rear amenity space to the detriment of the character of the locality. 2 The proposal, by reason of excessive size and bulk, and extent of hardsurfacing, would be unduly obtrusive, out of character and result in a loss of light and overshadowing to the detriment of the streetscene and the amenity of the adjoining residents. 3 The proposal by reason of its size, bulk and position of terraces and balconies, would give rise to overlooking and a loss of privacy to the detriment of the amenity of adjoining residents. 4 The proposal would result in the unacceptable loss of trees of significant amenity value which, in the opinion of the local planning authority, would be detrimental to the character and appearance of the locality.
INFORMATIVES 1 Standard Informative 41 - UDP & Deposit Draft UDP Policies & Proposals : (E4, E6, E25, E27, E45, T13); (SEP5, SD1, EP29, D4, D5, T13)
MAIN CONSIDERATIONS
1) Streetscene/Visual Amenity 2) Residential Amenity 3) Trees 4) Parking 5) Consultation Responses
continued/
99 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
Item 3/05 - P/1078/03CFU continued…..
INFORMATION a) Summary
UDP Key Policies: E4, E6, E25, E27, E45, T13 Deposit UDP Key Policies: SEP5, SD1, EP29, D4, D5, T13 TPO Car Parking Standard: 6 (7) Justified: 6 (7) Provided: 8 Site Area: 0.07 ha Habitable Rooms: 16 No. of Residential Rooms: 4 Density: 57 dph 229 hrph Council Interest: None b) Site Description
• detached derelict former chalet bungalow on northern side of Uxbridge Road • block of flats to immediate east, part 4 storey, known as Riverine Lodge • block of flats to immediate west, part 3 storey, known as The Chantries • detached house and garden to rear, fronting Old Lodge Way • trees on site frontage and around boundary contribute to a major tree mass identified for the area, protected by a TPO c) Proposal Details
• demolition of chalet bungalow • redevelopment to provide 4 storey building with basement to provide 4 flats with 8 parking spaces • building to have flat roof with stepped appearance, to include rear balconies, and front and rear terrace at 3rd floor level • existing vehicular access to site retained with ramp down to basement • rear garden depth of between 15 – 18m, rear amenity area of 190m2
continued/
100 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
Item 3/05 - P/1078/03CFU continued….. d) Relevant History
LBH/39754 Single Storey Front, 3 Storey Front And Rear REFUSED Extensions With Front And Rear Dormers To 01-FEB-90 Provide 8 Self-Contained Flats And Provision Of Parking Spaces At Front
LBH/40868 Single Storey Front, 3-Storey Front And Rear REFUSED Extensions With Front And Rear Dormers To 28-JUN-90 Provide Eight Self-Contained Flats And APPEAL Basement Car Parking DISMISSED
EAST/401/97/FUL Demolition Of Existing House And Construction REFUSED Of 4 Storey Building To Provide 4 Flats With 18-AUG-97 Underground Parking
Reasons for Refusal:-
“1) The proposal would represent overdevelopment of the site by reason of inadequate amenity space, contrary to the provisions of the Harrow Unitary Development Plan and detrimental to the character of the area.
2) The proposed building, by reason of excessive bulk would be unduly obtrusive and result in a loss of light and overshadowing and would be detrimental to the amenities of neighbouring residents.
3) Car parking cannot be satisfactorily provided within the curtilage of the site to meet the Council’s minimum requirements in respect of the development, and the likely increase in parking on the neighbouring highway(s) would be detrimental to the free flow and safety of traffic on the neighbouring highway(s).
4) The proposal would result in the unacceptable loss of trees of significant amenity value which, in the opinion of the Local Planning Authority, would be detrimental to the character and appearance of the locality.”
EAST/706/98/FUL Demolition Of Existing House And Construction REFUSED Of 4 Storey Building To Provide 4 Flats With 10-NOV-98 Underground Parking
Reasons for Refusal:-
“1) The proposed development, by reason of excessive bulk and extent of hardsurfacing, would be unduly obtrusive, out of character and result in a loss of light and overshadowing and would be detrimental to the amenities of neighbouring residents. continued/
101 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
Item 3/05 - P/1078/03CFU continued…..
2) The proposal would represent overdevelopment of the site, by reason of inadequate rear garden depth and amenity space, contrary to the provisions of the Harrow Unitary Development Plan and detrimental to the character of the locality.
3) The proposed development, by reason of its size, siting and position of windows would give rise to overlooking and a loss of privacy to the detriment of the amenities of neighbouring residents.
4) The proposals would result in the unacceptable loss of trees of significant amenity value which, in the opinion of the Local Planning Authority, would be detrimental to the character and appearance of the locality.”
EAST/1081/99/OUT Outline: Demolition Of Existing House & WITHDRAWN Construction Of 4 Storey Building Of 4 Flats With 02-MAR-00 Underground Parking
EAST/387/00/OUT Outline: Demolition Of Existing House And WITHDRAWN Construction Of 3 Storey Building To Provide 3 19-JUL-00 Flats With Underground Car Parking e) Applicant’s Statement
• design statement submitted justifying application • previous applications pre-date recent Government advice to avoid inefficient use of land and to seek greater density of development at places with good public transport corridors • density only just above 50 dph and similar to adjacent redevelopments • amenity space targets met if private terraces/balconies and front of building included • UDP parking standards met • BRE daylight and sunlight tests met for Riverine Lodge • proposal is for a 4 storey contemporary apartment building • upper floor is set back behind a parapet with a flat roof design • level of building carefully set to ensure good access to basement while keeping overall height of building at roofline as low as possible to create an appropriate change in roofline from The Chantries to Riverine Lodge • external materials and appearance will be high quality contemporary to respond to diversity in location continued/
102 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
Item 3/05 - P/1078/03CFU continued…..
f) Consultations
Thames Water: No objection Environment Agency: No comments to make
Notifications Sent Replies Expiry 52 12 07-JUL-03
Response: Building would be too close to Riverine Lodge and cause extensive overshadowing; loss of light; loss of privacy; likely to cause structural damage due to excavation for foundations; non-resident parking will cause problems in Old Lodge Way at junction with Uxbridge Road; extra traffic will cause noise and fumes; loss of rural view; traffic of RAF Stanmore Park should be considered; overdensity, will trees at bottom of garden be retained; oversaturation of narrow site with excessive density; unacceptable bulk; design out of keeping and ugly; set too far forward and thus visually detrimental; loss of visual amenity for neighbour; obtrusive and overdominant due to height and bulk; concern at effect on waterways of underground car park and structure of adjoining building; development ;not sympathetic to locality; loss of light due to height; overlooking; concern at where refuse containers will be stored.
APPRAISAL
1) Streetscene/Visual Amenity
The existing house is not prominent in the streetscene being set back from the site frontage which includes mature trees. There is also planting on both flank boundaries. The proposal would involve a substantially larger building than the existing house and would be less than 1m in places from either flank boundary. The new building would also be higher than the adjacent part of Riverine Lodge which is 3 storeys, and much higher than the adjacent development of The Chantries. The front of the site would be largely hardsurfaced to provide visitor parking spaces with a ramped access down into the basement parking area.
Whether all of the frontage trees would survive is questionable as an extensive retaining wall would be required adjacent to the trees. The net result would be a visually obtrusive building in the streetscene. Whilst both adjoining buildings are themselves substantial flatted developments, they occupy much wider sites with space around the buildings to the boundaries. The proposal would appear rather cramped with little space to either flank boundary and an extensive area of hardsurfacing at the front. It is considered that this would be detrimental to the streetscene and local visual amenity.
continued/
103 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
Item 3/05 - P/1078/03CFU continued…..
2) Residential Amenity
Riverine Lodge includes habitable room windows on the flank abutting the site, the closest being some 7m from the boundary. The Chantries also has flank windows but not to habitable rooms. The proposed development would have only en-suite bathroom windows facing Riverine Lodge, but would have kitchen, utility room and en- suite bathroom windows facing The Chantries. There would also be balconies at the rear close to the flank boundary with Riverine Lodge, and terraces at third floor level which would wraparound the flank of the building closest to Riverine Lodge. There would be overlooking from the terraces in particular and to a lesser extent the balconies. The siting of the building relative to Riverine Lodge would give rise to a loss of outlook and overlooking. There would therefore be a loss of residential amenity for the adjoining occupiers to either side. At the rear there is a tree screen on the boundary with the detached two storey house and it is not considered that there would be any overlooking notwithstanding the height of the proposed development.
3) Trees
A conifer, laurel and lime would be removed at the front of the site. In addition the close proximity of the access and ramp, in particular, to the trees on the site frontage to be retained raises questions as to the likelihood of their survival. It is considered that the level of likely tree loss would be prejudicial to the character and appearance of the area.
4) Parking
The proposal would meet the Council’s parking standards and there would be adequate visibility at the entrance. No objections are therefore made on this aspect of the proposal. The access ramp would require a retaining wall for the adjacent landscaped area however which raises other issues dealt with above.
5) Consultation Responses
These are largely dealt with above. The issue of structural damage is a matter for building regulations, not planning. Old Lodge Way has no parking restrictions, however the proposal meets the Council’s parking standards. The level of additional traffic to be expected from the 4 flats is not considered to be of significance given the existing traffic levels on Uxbridge Road. Loss of a rural view is not in itself a material consideration. The density would not be excessive in itself, given that of adjacent developments.
104 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
3/06 MOUNT PARK MANOR (FORMERLY CARLYON WEST/1210/02/CCO/SS1 HOUSE) MOUNT PARK ROAD, HARROW Ward: HARROW ON THE HILL
RETENTION OF TELESCOPIC POOL COVER.
CHAMELEON INTERNATIONAL
RECOMMENDATION
Plan Nos: 02/97/11; A0080
1) REFUSE permission for the development described in the application and submitted plans for the following reason(s):
1 The telescopic pool cover, by reason of its inappropriate modern design, its excessive height, width and depth, detracts from the character and appearance of the locally listed building and has a detrimental affect on it, and its setting. 2 The telescopic pool cover, by reason of its inappropriate modern design and excessive scale, adversely affects visual amenities within this part of the Conservation Area to the detriment of its character and appearance.
INFORMATIVES 1 Standard Informative 41 - UDP & Deposit Draft UDP Policies & Proposals : (E5, E6, E45, E35, E38, E17); (SD1, SD2, D4, D5, D13, D17, EP42)
2) That the Borough Solicitor be authorised to:
(a) Issue an Enforcement Notice pursuant to Section 172 of the Town & Country Planning Act 1990 requiring:
(i) the removal of the unauthorised telescopic pool cover within 2 months.
(b) Institute legal proceedings in the event of failure to:
(i) supply the information required by the Borough Solicitor through the issue of Notice(s) under Section 330 of the Town & Country Planning Act 1990;
and/or
(ii) comply with the Enforcement Notice
continued/
105 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
Item 3/06 - WEST/1210/02/CCO continued….
MAIN CONSIDERATIONS
1) Character and appearance of conservation area and locally listed building 2) Residential amenity 3) Consultation responses
INFORMATION a) Summary
UDP Key Policies: E5, E6, E45, E35, E38, E17 Deposit UDP Key Policies: SD1, SD2, D4, D5, D13, D17, Area of Special Character Locally Listed Building Conservation Area: Mount Park Estate Council Interest: None b) Site Description
• large detached dwellinghouse on southern side of Mount Park Road set in extensive grounds; • flanked by detached dwelling to east (Egerton) and block of flats to west (Bermuda House); • locally listed building; • deep rear garden: approx. 156m, part of it lying within the designated Metropolitan Open Land; • steep drop in levels, with the rear garden being at a much lower level than the house and the patio; • there is a high retaining wall (approx. 3.5m), and stairs leading down from the patio to the garden; • swimming pool close to retaining wall and located off-centre to the west; • 9-bay telescopic pool cover, attached to the retaining wall; • when extended, it is approx. 19.2m long, the height varying from 3m to 2.28m, and the width from 9.24m to 7.98m (1st bay 9.24m wide and 3m high, last bay 7.98m wide, 2.28m high); • metal/steel frame, dark green. c) Proposal Details
• retention of 9-bay telescopic pool cover;
continued/
106 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
Item 3/06 - WEST/1210/02/CCO continued…. d) Relevant History
W/862/01/FUL Provision of railings on front boundary wall, GRANTED reinstatement of archway and double gates. 05-JUN-2002.
W/854/01/FUL Front extension to garage and provision of GRANTED wall and gate between front yard area and. 05-JUN-2002. side patio
LBH/7053/1 Demolition of existing premises and erection REFUSED of 15 detached houses with double garages 18-DEC-1972. and access road (outline). e) Applicant’s statement
• there is already a permission for a solid brick structure where the telescopic pool cover is located; • the telescopic pool cover is an intermediate solution and less intrusive. f) Consultations
CAAC: Object. Fails to preserve or enhance the character and appearance of the Conservation Area. It is large, overbearing and bulky. Will be out most of the year.
Advertisement Character and Appearance Expiry of Conservation Area 03-APR-03
Notifications Sent Replies Expiry 20 5 24-MAR-03
Response: Does not preserve or enhance Conservation Area, large/"massive structure"; is visible from adjacent properties, noise from retracting and extending cover, disturbance, adverse impact on visual amenities within the Conservation Area, structure too close to boundary, "eyesore", inappropriate extension to the house.
APPRAISAL
1) Character and Appearance of Conservation Area and Locally Listed Building
The pool cover is of a simple, minimalist modern design, and is set at a lower level than the house. However, the structure, by reason of its excessive scale and its inappropriate modern design which conflicts with the traditional design of the house, is a dominant feature. Therefore, it is considered that the cover has an intrusive impact on the setting of the locally listed building at the rear. continued/ 107 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
Item 3/06 - WEST/1210/02/CCO continued….
Furthermore, it is considered that the pool cover, due to its size, adversely affects views within the conservation area. It fails to preserve or enhance the character and appearance of the conservation area.
2) Residential Amenity
The pool cover does not block out light to the adjoining property or appear overbearing to the residents thereof, and it is considered that it does not have any materially adverse impacts on the residential amenities of the neighbouring occupiers.
3) Consultation Responses
All relevant planning issues raised by objectors are addressed in the report. Contrary to the applicant’s statement, there does not appear to be a planning permission for a ‘solid brick structure’ where the pool cover is currently located. The history of the site has been researched under both the current and the previous name of the property.
ENFORCEMENT CONSIDERATIONS
1. Breach of Planning Control
1.1 Without planning permission the installation of a telescopic pool cover.
2. Reason for Enforcement
2.1 The telescopic pool cover, by reason of its inappropriate modern design, its excessive height, width and depth detracts from the character and appearance of the locally listed building and has a detrimental affect on it, and its setting.
2.2 The telescopic pool cover, by reason of its inappropriate modern design and excessive scale adversely affects visual amenities within this part of the Conservation Area to the detriment of its character and appearance.
2.3 Standard Informative 41 - UDP & Deposit Draft UDP Policies & Proposals : (E5, E6, E45, E35, E38, E17); (SD1, SD2, D4, D5, D13, D17, EP42)
108 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
SECTION 5 - PRIOR APPROVAL APPLICATIONS 5/01 O/S ON ROAD IN FRONT OF 332 ALEXANDRA AVE, P/1453/03/CDT/SS1 SOUTH HARROW Ward: ROXBOURNE
PROVISION OF 12M COLUMN MAST WITH THREE INTEGRAL ANTENNAS, EQUIPMENT CABINET AND A/C CABINET
T-MOBILE (UK) LTD for STAPPARD & HOWES
RECOMMENDATION
Plan Nos: 1110/135/001/A
1. Prior approval of siting and appearance is required.
2. REFUSE approval of details of siting/appearance for the following reason(s):
1 The proposed development, by reason of scale, appearance and siting, would be detrimental to the visual amenities in the area.
INFORMATIVES 1 Standard Informative 41 - UDP & Deposit Draft UDP Policies & Proposals : (E6, E46, E52); (S1, D4, D26) 2 Standard Informative 36 – Measurements from Submitted Plans
MAIN CONSIDERATIONS
1) Visual amenity 2) Consultation responses
INFORMATION a) Summary
UDP Key Policies: E6, E46, E52 Deposit UDP Key Policies: S1, D4, D26 Council Interest: None
continued/
109 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
Item 5/01 - P/1453/03/CDT continued….. b) Site Description
• this part of Alexandra Avenue is a straight piece of road with a formal appearance; • carriageway raised in relation to surrounding land; flanked by 3-storey pitched roof blocks of flats set away from the highway. The footway, grass verge, 0.7m high brick wall and access road and between the blocks and the highway); • nearest blocks to proposal site: 332 Alexandra Avenue (approx.37m south-east of proposal site) and 334 Alexandra Avenue (approx. 25m north-east of proposal site). c) Proposal Details
• provision of 12m high column mast with three integral antennas, finish to match existing lampposts, sited to edge of footway towards the grass strip (as with lampposts in vicinity) 8m south of the junction of the access road with Alexandra Avenue; • equipment cabinet (proposed colour: grey), dimensions: 1.7m wide, 0.95m deep and 1.6m high located 6.5m east of the proposed mast behind the brick wall; • link A/C cabinet 0.5m wide, 0.6m deep and 1.2m high located directly next to equipment cabinet. d) Relevant History
WEST/734/01/DTE 303 Alexandra Avenue: Determination: 12.5m REFUSED mast with 2 equipment cabinets O/S 303 19-SEP-01 Alexandra Avenue.
Reasons for Refusal:-
1. The siting of the proposed mast would prejudice the implementation of the Alexandra Avenue cycle track and associated footway widening scheme, contrary to the Council’s Development Plan policies for measures to encourage cycle use.
2. The proposed development would result in an unacceptable impact on the visual and residential amenities of neighbouring residential occupiers and the character of the locality. e) Applicant’s Statement
• the proposed mast would integrate well within the existing street scene and street furniture; • the site is required in order to provide 3G coverage and capacity to the provider’s network; • no other adequate sites found; • proposal complies with ICNIRP guidelines. continued/
110 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003
Item 5/01 - P/1453/03/CDT continued…..
f) Notifications Sent Replies Expiry 123 0 22-JUL-03
APPRAISAL
1) Visual amenity
The proposed mast would be approx. 4 m higher than the existing lamp posts, and its girth at the top would be considerably greater. There are no mature and large trees close enough to the proposed mast to soften its appearance in the street scene.
In terms of the amenities of residential property owners the proposed mast would not be erected directly outside any of the blocks on Alexandra Avenue, and only oblique views from the properties on that side of the road would be afforded.
It is considered however that the proposed mast would appear obtrusive in the street scene, to the detriment of the visual amenities in the area generally.
2) Consultation Responses
None.
111 ______Development Control Committee Wednesday 30th July 2003