Agenda and minutes

RESOLVED – That the minutes of the meeting held on the 9^th May 2017 be agreed as a correct record.

.

None.

Councillor Mittra declared a non-pecuniary interest in relation to item 6 and 7 – The Sternberg Centre, by virtue of one of the speakers being a previous customer of his mother.

Councillor Melvin Cohen declared a non-pecuniary interest in regard to 18 Clifton Gardens, by virtue of the development being next to his firm’s car park.

None.

The Committee noted the Addendum.

The Planning Officer introduced the report.

The Planning Officer noted that there was an error in the addendum and that 205 objections had been rather than 204.

An oral representation was made in objection to the item by Mr Tony Chilchick.

An oral representation was made in objection to the item by Mr Julian Glaser.

Following discussion of the item, the Chairman moved to the recommendation in the report, which was to refuse he application due to the loss of the tree.

The votes were recorded as follows:

·         Councillor Schneiderman was absent from the vote due lateness and entering after discussion of the item had commenced.

The Committee therefore RESOLVED to REFUSE the application as per the Officers report.

The Planning Officer introduced the report.

The Environmental Health Officer discussed the application.

An oral representation was made in objection to the item by Franklin Dannenberg.

An oral representation was made in objection to the item by Alan Grahame.

An oral representation was made by Councillor Old, the Ward Councillor in objection to the item.

Following discussion the Chairman moved the motion to refuse the application. This was seconded by Councillor Mittra. The reasons given for refusal were as follows:

-       The details of landscaping and boundary treatment would be contrary to the character and appearance of the streetscene and general locality and would also be contrary to policies DM01of the Development Management Policies and CS5 of the Core Strategy,

Votes on the motion to refuse were recorded as follows:

The Committee therefore RESOLVED to REFUSE the application as per the reasons set out above.

</AI7>

<AI8>

The Planning Officer introduced the report.

An oral representation was made in objection to the item by Mr Dan Coppel.

An oral representation was made in objection to the item by Ms Anne Linton.

An oral representation was made by the applicant Mr Edward Ben-Nathan.

Following discussion of the item, Councillor Ryde moved the motion to defer the application in order to allow the applicant to prepare a management plan showing how the tennis court would be managed to prevent harm to neighbouring amenity.  The motion was seconded by the Chairman.

The votes for the motion to defer the item were recorded as follows:

The Committee therefore RESOLVED to DEFER the item to a future meeting

The Planning Officer introduced the report.

An oral representation was made in objection to the item by Mrs Byrne.

An oral representation was made in objection to the item by a resident,

An oral representation was made by a representative for the applicant Mr Alex Atkinson.

Following discussion of the item, the Chairman moved to the recommendations set out in the Officers report, to approve the application subject to conditions.

The reasons for refusal were as follows:

The proposed extension would result in harmful loss of visual amenity due to loss of outlook to neighbouring residential occupiers. The proposal would be contrary to policy DM01 of the Development Management Policies.

The Committee therefore RESOLVED to REFUSE the application for the reasons outlined above.

</AI9>

<AI10>

The Planning Officer introduced the report.

An oral representation was made in objection to the application by Mr Gelley on behalf of Mrs Gelley.

Following discussion of the item, Councillor Marshall moved a motion that the item be deferred to the next meeting to allow officers to visits neighbouring residents at 404-406 Finchley Road to look at the impact of the proposals on these residents. The motion was seconded by the Chairman.

The votes for the motion to defer the item were recorded as follows:

The Committee therefore RESOLVED to DEFER the item until the next meeting.

</AI10>

<AI11>

The Planning Officer introduced the application, which related to The Sternberg Centre.

An oral representation in objection to the application was heard by Dr Kim Bryan.

An oral representation in objection to the application was heard from Sue Liu.

An oral representation was made on behalf of the applicant by Mr Daniel Rozenvelder.

Following discussion of the item, the Committee agreed to add the following additional conditions to the application:

·         Councillor Mittra was absent form this vote due to his declaration of interest relating to this item.

The Committee therefore RESOLVED to APPROVE the application, subject to conditions as per the officer’s report.

An oral representation in objection to the application was heard from Sue Liu.

An oral representation was made on behalf of the applicant by Mr Daniel Rozenvelder.

Following discussion of the item, the Chairman moved to the recommendation in the cover report, which was to approve subject to conditions set out in the report. Votes were recorded as follows:

·         Councillor Mittra was absent form this vote due to his declaration of interest relating to this item.

The Committee therefore RESOLVED to APPROVE the application, subject to conditions as per the officer’s report.

The Planning Officer introduced the report.

An oral representation was made in objection to the item by Mr Chris Wilson.

Following discussion of the item, the Chairman moved to the recommendation in the cover report to approve the application subject to the conditions set out in the report:

The Committee therefore RESOLVED to APPROVE the application subject to the conditions set out as per the Officers report.

The Planning Officer introduced the report, which related to Avenue Tennis Club.

An oral representation was made by the applicant Patricia Moore.

Following discussion of the item, the Chairman moved to the recommendations in the cover report, which were to approve subject to the conditions set out in the report.

Votes were recorded as follows:

The Committee therefore RESOLVED to APPORVE the application, subject to the conditions as per the officer’s report.

The Planning Officer introduced the report.

An oral representation was made in objection to the item by Judy Berman.

An oral representation was made in objection to the item by Adrian Press.

An oral representation was made in objection to the item by Nick Ferguson representing the applicant.

Following discussion of the item the Committee agreed to add the following additional conditions to the application:

Before the development hereby permitted is occupied details of proposed landscaping to screen the proposed parking spaces shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. b) All work comprised in the approved scheme of landscaping shall be carried out before the end of the first planting and seeding season following occupation of any part of the buildings or completion of the development, whichever is sooner, or commencement of the use.

c) Any existing tree shown to be retained or trees or shrubs to be planted as part of the approved landscaping scheme which are removed, die, become severely damaged or diseased within five years of the completion of development shall be replaced with trees or shrubs of appropriate size and species in the next planting season.

Reason: To ensure a satisfactory appearance to the development  and protect neighbouring amenity in accordance with Policies CS5 and CS7 of the Local Plan Core Strategy DPD (adopted September 2012), Policy DM01 of the Development Management Policies DPD (adopted September 2012), the Sustainable Design and Construction SPD (adopted April 2013) and 7.21 of the London Plan 2015.

The Chairman moved to the recommendations in the cover report which were to approve subject to conditions and the additional conditions outlined above.

Votes were recorded as follows:

The Chairman used her casting vote to approve the application.

*Councillor Cohen was absent from the vote due to his declaration of interest outlined above.

The Committee RESOLVED to APPROVE the application, subject to the conditions as the officer’s report.

</AI15>

<AI16>

The Planning Officer introduced the report.

An oral representation was made in objection to the item by Mr Jan Piechowicz.

Following discussion of the item Councillor Schneiderman moved the motion to defer the item until after a site visit has taken place. The motion was seconded by Councillor Mittrra.

The votes on the motion to defer the item were as follows:

The Committee therefore RESOLVED to DEFER the item to the next meeting.

The Planning Officer introduced the report.

An oral representation was made in objection to the item by Mr Richard Ross.

Following discussion of the item, the Chairman moved to the recommendations to approve the application subjection to the conditions outlined in the cover report. The votes were recorded as follows:

The Committee therefore RESOLVED to APPROVE the item subject to the conditions as per the Officer’s report.

The Planning Officer introduced the report.

An oral representation was made in objection to the item by the applicants agent.

Following discussion of the item, the Chairman moved to the recommendation in the cover report, which was to approve the report subject to the conditions set out in the report.

The votes were recorded as follows:

The Committee therefore RESOLVED to APPROVE the application.

The Planning Officer introduced the report.

An oral representation was made in objection to the item by Mr Alan Crossan.

Following discussion of the item, the Committee agreed to add the following additional conditions to the application:

Discharge of permission condition 18a and 18b. BS5837 Tree Survey, Tree Constraints & Tree Protection for proposed development (Received 14/06/2017)

The Chairman moved to the recommendation to approve the item subject to the conditions as per the Officer’s report.

Votes were recorded as follows:

The Committee therefore RESOLVED to APPROVE the application.

The item was deferred by Officers before the meeting.

None.

The meeting finished at 9.15pm.