Agenda and minutes

The minutes of the meeting of 28 July 2014 were approved as a correct record.

There were none.

Members declared the following interests:

There was none.

There were none.

There were none.

The Committee noted the receipt of the additional information as set out in the addendum.

The Committee heard oral representations from Mr Spencer Levine and Ms Sue Wilder, objecting to the application, and the applicant.

Votes were recorded as follows:

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

The Committee noted the receipt of the additional information as set out in the addendum.

Votes were recorded as follows:

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

The Committee noted the receipt of the additional information as set out in the addendum.

The Committee heard oral representations from Mr Peter Bellman and Mr Graham Barber objecting to the application, and the applicant.

Following discussion, the Chairperson;

RESOLVED to refer the application to the Planning Committee for decision.

The Committee noted the receipt of the additional information as set out in the addendum.

Councillor Arjun Mittra, Councillor Alan Schneiderman and Councillor Jim Tierney abstained from voting on the application.

Votes were recorded as follows:

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

The Committee noted the receipt of the additional information as set out in the addendum.

The Committee heard oral representations from Mr Huang objecting to the application, and the applicant.

Votes were recorded as follows:

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

The Committee noted the receipt of the additional information as set out in the addendum.

The Committee heard oral representations from Dr Bernadette Loughnan objecting to the application, and the applicant.

Votes were recorded as follows:

RESOLVED TO REFUSE the application (being a reversal of Officer’s recommendations) for the following reasons:

Reasons for refusal:

1. The proposed development, by reason of the number of units and increased floorspace would result in an overdevelopment of the site to the detriment of the character of the street contrary to policy DM01 of the Barnet Local Plan Development Management Policies (Adopted) 2012 and the Residential Design Guidance SPD 2013.

2. The units, by reason of their size would provide sub-standard accommodation to the detriment of the amenity of future occupiers contrary to policy DM01 and DM02 of the Barnet Local Plan Development Management Policies (Adopted) 2012 and the Sustainable Design and Construction SPD 2013.

3. The development would require a section 106 agreement and no formal undertaking is given to the Council, as a result the proposed development would, by reason of the developer not meeting the costs of amending the traffic order contrary to DM17 of the Local Plan Development Management Policies (Adopted) 2012; and contrary to Policies CS9 of the Local Plan Core Strategy (Adopted) 2012.

Informatives:

1.         The plans accompanying this application are: Site location plan, 654-S01, 654-SS.01A, 654-SS.02A, 654-GA.01A, 654-GA.02A, 654-GA.03A, 654-GA.04A, 654-GA.05A, 654-GA.06A, 654-GA.07A, 654-GA.08A, 654-GA.09A, 654-GA.10A, 654-GA.11A, 654-SU.01, 654-SU.02, 654-SU.03, 654-SU.04, 654-SU.05, 654-SU.06, 654-SU.07, 654-SU.08, 654-SU.09, Code for Sustainable Homes, Planning Statement, Schedule of Accommodation.

2.         In accordance with paragraphs 186 and 187 of the NPPF, the Council takes a positive and proactive approach to development proposals, focused on solutions. To assist applicants in submitting development proposals, the Local Planning Authority has produced planning policies and written guidance to guide applicants when submitting applications. These are all available on the Council’s website. A pre-application advice service is also offered. The applicant sought formal pre-application advice which was provided. If the applicant wishes to submit a further application, the Council is willing to assist in identifying possible solutions through the pre-application advice service.

3.         This is a reminder that should an application for appeal be allowed, then the proposed development would be deemed as 'chargeable development', defined as development of one or more additional units, and / or an increase to existing floor space of more than 100 sq m.  Therefore the following information may be of interest and use to the developer and in relation to the appeal process itself:

The Mayor of London adopted a Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) charge on 1st April 2012 setting a rate of £35 per sq m on all forms of development in Barnet except for a £0 per sq m rate for education and health developments. This planning application was assessed as liable for a £20,213.20 payment under Mayoral CIL at this time.

The London Borough of Barnet adopted a CIL charge on  ...  view the full minutes text for item 12.

The Committee noted the receipt of the additional information as set out in the addendum.

Votes were recorded as follows:

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

This item was withdrawn from the agenda at the request of officers.

Votes were recorded as follows:

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

Councillor Jim Tierney moved that consideration of the application be deferred until the next meeting of the Finchley and Golders Green Area Planning Committee in October, in order to enable residents to review amended plans.

Councillor Arjun Mittra seconded the motion.

The votes were recorded as follows:

The motion was carried.

RESOLVED, to defer consideration of the application be deferred until the next meeting of the Finchley and Golders Green Area Planning Committee in October.

Votes were recorded as follows:

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

Councillor Arjun Mittra absented himself from the meeting for consideration of this item.

Votes were recorded as follows:

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

Votes were recorded as follows:

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

There were none.