Agenda and draft minutes

RESOLVED that the minutes of the meeting held on 15 July 2019, be agreed as a correct record.

The Chairman welcomed everyone to the meeting, explained the procedure and stated that the running order had been revised.

Councillor Richard Cornelius sent apologies. Councillor Alison Cornelius substituted for him.

None.

Items contained within the addendum would be dealt with under individual agenda items.

The Committee received the report and addendum to the report.

Representations were heard from Rose Jackson and the applicant’s representative.

RESOLVED that the application be approved, subject to the conditions in the report, the addendum and the Committee grants delegated authority to the Service Director – Planning and Building Control or Head of Strategic Planning to make any minor alterations, additions or deletions to the recommended conditions/obligations as set out in this report and addendum provided this authority shall be exercised after consultation with the Chairman (or in his absence the Vice- Chairman) of the Committee (who may request that such alterations, additions or deletions be first approved by the Committee).

The Committee received the report.

A representation was heard from the applicant’s agent.

The Committee voted on the Officer’s recommendation to approve the application:

It was moved by Councillor Williams and seconded by Councillor Weeden-Sanz that the application be refused for the following reasons:

The proposed development would by reason of its size, siting, bulk, height and massing would detrimentally harm the character and appearance of the street scene and the wider surrounding area. As such the proposal would be contrary to policies 7.4, 7.6 of the London Plan, policies CS1 and CS5 of Barnet’s Adopted Core Strategy (2012) and policies DM01 of the Adopted Development Management Policies DPD (2012).

RESOLVED that the application be refused for the reasons detailed above.

The Committee received the report.

Representations were heard from Julie Hogg and the applicant.

RESOLVED that the application be approved subject to the conditions detailed in the report and the Committee grants delegated authority to the Service Director – Planning and Building Control or Head of Strategic Planning to make any minor alterations, additions or deletions to the recommended conditions/obligations as set out in this report and addendum provided this authority shall be exercised after consultation with the Chairman (or in his absence the Vice- Chairman) 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 Derek Dishman and the applicant.

The Committee voted on the Officer’s recommendation to approve the application as follows:

It was moved by Councillor Roberts and seconded by Councillor Williams that the application be refused for the following reasons:

Over intensification, heritage and character.

At this point the Committee were advised by the Solicitor, that in his opinion there were not strong enough grounds to refuse this application and the Chairman also echoed this view.         The Solicitor also stated that the grounds outlined for refusal were weak and that the authority was likely to lose on appeal.

The Committee voted as follows on the motion to refuse the application for the reasons stated:

The Chairman used his casting vote against refusal.

As the Committee had neither voted to approve or refuse the application, the Chairman moved that the application be deferred until the next meeting, to receive a further officer report back clarifying the position, particularly in relation to potential refusal of the application and the ramifications associated with that. The motion was seconded by Councillor Alison Cornelius.

A vote was taken on motion to defer the application to the next meeting of the Committee for the reasons outlined above:

RESOLVED that the application be deferred until the next meeting of the Committee for the reasons outlined above.

</AI10>

<AI11>

The Committee received the report and addendum to the report.

A representation was heard from the applicant’s agent.

The Committee voted on the Officer’s recommendation to approve the application as follows:

It was moved by Councillor Sowerby and seconded by Councillor Prentice that the application be refused for the following reasons:

The proposed development by reason of its massing, scale and its excessive height by virtue of the proposed extensions to the roof would represent a significant departure from the local plan detrimental to the character and appearance of the surrounding area. Furthermore, the proposed additional floors to the rear together with its excessive rearward projection would result in a visually obtrusive form of development detrimental to the visual amenities of the locality and the street scene when viewed from Lyonsdown Road elevation.As such the proposed development would be contrary to policies CS1, CS5 and CS NPPF of the Adopted Core Strategy (2012) and policies DM01 and DM05 of the Adopted Development Management Policies DPD (2012).

RESOLVED that the application be refused for the reasons detailed above.

None.