Agenda and minutes

The minutes of the meeting held on 1 November 2017, were agreed as a correct record.

Councillor Kathy Levine sent her apologies.

None.

None.

Supplements were dealt with under individual agenda items.

The Committee received the report. Representations were heard from the Applicant, as well as Mr Joe Molloy in objection to the application.

A vote was taken as follows on the Officer’s recommendation to approve the application:

It was moved by Councillor Sowerby and seconded by Councillor Williams that the Officer’s recommendation be overturned and that the application be REFUSED for the following reasons:

The construction of the new dwelling is an inappropriate form of development within the green belt and does not preserve its openness. No very special circumstances have been demonstrated that would justify the development, (i.e. the need for an agricultural worker to live permanently on the site is not a “very special circumstance”). The development would therefore have an unacceptable impact on the aims, purpose and openness of the Green Belt, contrary to Policies CS NPPF, CS1 and CS7 of the Local Plan Core Strategy (adopted September 2012), Policy DM15 of Barnet's Local Plan Development Management Policies (Adopted September 2012), and paragraph 55 and section 9 of the National Planning Policy Framework Published 2012.

A vote was taken on the motion to refuse the application:

RESOLVED that the application be REFUSED, for the reason detailed above.

The Committee received the report. A vote was taken on the Officer’s recommendation to approve the application as follows:

RESOLVED that;

1. the application be approved, subject to the conditions detailed in the report;

2. AND the Committee grants delegated authority to the Head of Development Management or Head of Strategic Planning to make any minor alterations, additions or deletions to the recommended conditions/obligations or reasons for refusal as set out in this report and addendum provided this authority shall be exercised after consultation with the Chairman (or in his absence the ViceChairman) of the Committee (who may request that such alterations, additions or deletions be first approved by the Committee).

The Committee received the report. A vote was taken on the Officer’s recommendation to approve the application as follows:

RESOLVED that;

1. the application be approved, subject to the conditions detailed in the report;

2. AND the Committee grants delegated authority to the Head of Development Management or Head of Strategic Planning to make any minor alterations, additions or deletions to the recommended conditions/obligations or reasons for refusal as set out in this report and addendum provided this authority shall be exercised after consultation with the Chairman (or in his absence the ViceChairman) of the Committee (who may request that such alterations, additions or deletions be first approved by the Committee).

The Committee received the report and addendum. Representations were heard from the Applicant’s agent as well as Mr Feroze Dada and Mr Selwyn in objection to the application.

A vote was taken on the Officer’s recommendation to approve the application as follows:

RESOLVED that;

1. the application be approved, subject to the conditions detailed in the report and as per the amended description set out in the addendum;

2. AND the Committee grants delegated authority to the Head of Development Management or Head of Strategic Planning to make any minor alterations, additions or deletions to the recommended conditions/obligations or reasons for refusal as set out in this report and addendum provided this authority shall be exercised after consultation with the Chairman (or in his absence the ViceChairman) of the Committee (who may request that such alterations, additions or deletions be first approved by the Committee).

The Committee received the report and addendum. Objections to the application were heard from Mrs R Sandhouse and Mr G Sandhouse.

Following discussion on the application, new conditions were proposed as follows:

Amended condition 1:

1. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans:

Drawing No. 24NOR/281/01, titled ‘Floor Plan, Elevations and Sections’; dated September 2017, Drawing No. 24NOR/281/02, titled ‘Existing Site Plan’ and ‘Existing Location Plan’; dated August 2017, Drawing No. 24NOR/281/03, titled ‘Proposed Site Plan’ and ‘Proposed Location Plan’; dated August 2017.

Amended condition 4:

4. The use of the outbuilding hereby permitted shall not be used before 9am or after 6pm on any day.

New condition 6:

a) No development shall commence on site in connection with the development hereby approved until a report has been carried out by a competent acoustic consultant that assesses the likely noise impacts on residents of adjoining properties, particularly in Farnham Close to the rear, from the use of the outbuilding by all residents and staff of ‘Courtlands’ for all uses specified on the approved drawings, and mitigation measures for the development to reduce these noise impacts to acceptable levels, has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

The report shall include all calculations and baseline data, and be set out so that the Local Planning Authority can fully audit the report and critically analyse the content and recommendations.

b) The measures approved under this condition shall be implemented in their entirety prior to the commencement of the use/first occupation of the development and retained as such thereafter.

Reason: To ensure that the proposed development does not prejudice the amenities of occupiers of neighbouring properties in accordance with Policy DM04 of the Development Management Policies DPD (adopted September 2012), the Sustainable Design and Construction SPD (adopted April 2013) and Policy 7.15 of the London Plan 2015.

A vote was taken on the conditions as follows:

RESOLVED that the above conditions be included in the application.

 A vote was taken on the Officer’s recommendation to approve the application as follows:

RESOLVED that;

1. the application be approved, subject to the conditions detailed in the report and addendum and including the conditions as set out above;

2. AND the Committee grants delegated authority to the Head of Development Management or Head of Strategic Planning to make any minor alterations, additions or deletions to the recommended conditions/obligations or reasons for refusal as set out in this report and addendum provided this authority shall be exercised after consultation with the Chairman (or in his absence the ViceChairman) of the Committee (who may request that such alterations, additions or deletions be first approved by the Committee).

The Committee received the report and addendum. Representations were heard from the Applicant’s agent.

A vote was taken on the Officer’s recommendation to approve the application as follows:

RESOLVED that;

1. the application be approved, subject to the conditions detailed in the report and as per the additional condition set out in the addendum;

2. AND the Committee grants delegated authority to the Head of Development Management or Head of Strategic Planning to make any minor alterations, additions or deletions to the recommended conditions/obligations or reasons for refusal as set out in this report and addendum provided this authority shall be exercised after consultation with the Chairman (or in his absence the ViceChairman) of the Committee (who may request that such alterations, additions or deletions be first approved by the Committee).

The Committee received the report.

Following discussion on the application, amended conditions were proposed as follows:

Amended condition 4:

The use hereby permitted shall not be open to customers before 8:00am or after 8:00pm on Mondays to Saturdays  or before 10.00am or after 7.00pm on Sundays and bank and public holidays.

Amended condition 6:

The extraction and fan equipment hereby permitted shall not be operated before 8:00am or after 8:00pm on Mondays to Saturdays  or before 10.00am or after 7.00pm on Sundays and bank and public holidays.

A vote was taken on the Officer’s recommendation to approve the application and amended conditions as follows:

RESOLVED that;

1. the application be approved, subject to the conditions detailed in the report and addendum, and as per the amended conditions set out above;

2. AND the Committee grants delegated authority to the Head of Development Management or Head of Strategic Planning to make any minor alterations, additions or deletions to the recommended conditions/obligations or reasons for refusal as set out in this report and addendum provided this authority shall be exercised after consultation with the Chairman (or in his absence the ViceChairman) of the Committee (who may request that such alterations, additions or deletions be first approved by the Committee).

The Committee received the report. Representations were heard from the Applicant, as well as Mr Edward Dogliani in objection to the application.

A vote was taken on the Officer’s recommendation to approve the application as follows:

RESOLVED that;

1. the application be approved, subject to the conditions detailed in the report;

2. AND the Committee grants delegated authority to the Head of Development Management or Head of Strategic Planning to make any minor alterations, additions or deletions to the recommended conditions/obligations or reasons for refusal as set out in this report and addendum provided this authority shall be exercised after consultation with the Chairman (or in his absence the ViceChairman) of the Committee (who may request that such alterations, additions or deletions be first approved by the Committee).

The Committee received the report. Representations were heard from the Applicant’s agent, as well as Mr Federman, Ms Josephine Thelermont and Cllr Caroline Stock in objection to the application.

 A vote was taken as follows on the Officer’s recommendation to approve the application:

It was moved by Councillor Sowerby and seconded by Councillor Roberts that the Officer’s recommendation be overturned and that the application be REFUSED for the following reasons:

The proposed development, by reason of the size, scale, mass and bulk of the rear extensions and the new roof, would cumulatively amount to a disproportionate addition to the main dwelling and would be out of keeping with the street scene and the general locality. Moreover, the proposed development would appear intrusive and overbearing, resulting in an increased sense of enclosure which would be detrimental to the residential amenities of both adjoining occupiers, particularly no. 99 Greenway. The development would therefore be contrary to Policies 7.4 and 7.6 of the London Plan (2016), Policy CS5 of the Adopted  Barnet Local Plan Core Strategy (2012), policy DM01 of the Adopted Barnet Development Management Policies DPD (2012) and the Residential Design Guidance SPD (2016).

A vote was taken on the motion to refuse the application:

RESOLVED that the application be REFUSED, for the reason detailed above.

None.