Agenda and minutes

RESOLVED – That the minutes of the meeting held on the 9 January 2013 were approved as a correct record.

There were none.

There were none.

The sub-Committee noted the receipt of the additional information set out in the tabled addendum.

The sub-Committee having heard from Mr Michael Caro (on behalf of the Totteridge Residents Association) speaking in objection to the application and the applicant’s response;

RESOLVED TO REFUSE (reversal of the Officers recommendations) the application for the following reason;

1)         The proposed building, by reason of its mass, bulk, height and design including a lift shaft projecting above the main roof, would appear as a prominent and obtrusive feature within the street scene and together with the excessive rearward projection of the proposed single storey rear additions would result in a development detrimental to the character and appearance of the area. The proposal is therefore contrary to Policies DM01 and DM02 of the Adopted Local Plan Development Management Policies DPD (September 2012), and Policies CS NPPF and CS5 of the Adopted Local Plan Core Strategy DPD (September 2012).

2)         The proposed single storey rear extensions, by reason of their height, depth and proximity to the common boundaries with both neighbouring properties, would appear overbearing and visually obtrusive when viewed from the rear private amenity areas at the neighbouring properties. They would be detrimental to the amenities of the occupants of these neighbouring properties, and the proposal is therefore contrary to Policies DM01 and DM02 of the Adopted Local Plan Development Management Policies DPD (September 2012), and Policies CS NPPF and CS5 of the Adopted Local Plan Core Strategy DPD (September 2012).

3)         The development does not include a formal undertaking to meet the extra health, education and libraries services costs together with associated monitoring costs arising as a result of the development, contrary to Supplementary Planning Document - Planning Obligations, Supplementary Planning Document - Contributions to Health Facilities, Supplementary Planning Document - Contributions to Education, Supplementary Planning Document - Contributions to Libraries, and Policies CS10, CS11 and CS15 of the Adopted Barnet Local Plan Core Strategy DPD (2012).

Informative:

The applicant is reminded that, given this planning application has been refused, the works currently being undertaken on site do not benefit from planning permission. The applicant should take steps immediately to rectify this position, and is reminded that any works that do take place are entirely at the applicant’s own risk.

The sub-Committee;

RESOLVED TO APPROVE the application as per the Officer’s report and subject to (i) the conditions set out in the report and  (ii) the following amendments

1.         Add policy DM17 to the list of policies in informative 1 on page 15.

2.         Add the following condition:

“Before the flats hereby approved are occupied, parking spaces shall be provided as shown on the approved drawings. The spaces shall thereafter be retained in the approved form and shall be used for no other purpose than the parking of vehicles in connection with the flats.

Reason:

To ensure that parking is provided in accordance with the council’s standards in the interests of pedestrian and highway safety, the free flow of traffic and in order to protect the amenities of the area in accordance with policies DM17 of the Adopted Barnet Development Management Policies DPD (2012) and 6.1, 6.2 and 6.3 of the London Plan 2011”.

The sub-Committee having heard from Mr Scott Williams objecting the application and the applicant’s response;

RESOLVED TO APPROVE the application as per the Officer’s report and subject to (i) the conditions set out in the report and (ii) subject to the following amendment;

1.         Amend Condition 4 as follows;

“Before the building hereby permitted is occupied, the window facing Grove Road shall be glazed with obscure glass, shall be permanently fixed shut and shall be retained as such thereafter.”

The sub-Committee;

RESOLVED TO APPROVE the application as per the Officer’s report and subject to the conditions set out in the report.