Agenda and minutes

Venue: Hendon Town Hall, The Burroughs, London NW4 4BQ. View directions

Contact: Tracy Scollin 020 8359 2315 Email: tracy.scollin@barnet.gov.uk 

Items
No. Item

1.

Minutes of last meeting pdf icon PDF 65 KB

Minutes:

The minutes were approved as an accurate record.

2.

Absence of Members (If any)

Minutes:

Apologies were received from Councillor Danny Rich.

3.

Declaration of Members' Disclosable Pecuniary interests and Non Pecuniary interests (If any)

Minutes:

Councillor Cohen declared a non-pecuniary interest in relation to Item 11; (Land to the rear of 1069 Finchley Rd) the premises were close to his office.

 

Councillor Ryde declared a non-pecuniary interest in relation to items 11, 16 and 20 Tudor Court and  1-12 Gloucester Gardens, as some of the names were known to him. He had previously declared an interest

4.

Report of the Monitoring Officer (If any)

Minutes:

None.

5.

Addendum pdf icon PDF 136 KB

Minutes:

An addendum was received in relation to items 6,7,8,16,20 and 23.

6.

70 North End Road, NW11 7SY 18/1480/FUL pdf icon PDF 700 KB

Minutes:

The item was deferred as at the site visit the previous day there had been no access to the site.

7.

44 Glebe Road, N3 2AX 18/1545/FUL pdf icon PDF 722 KB

Minutes:

The Planning Officer presented the report and addendum.

 

A resident who had registered an objection was not in attendance.

 

The applicant addressed the Committee.

 

It was noted that 3 conditions had been added and were included in the addendum.

 

The vote was recorded as follows:

 

For (approval) - 3

Against (approval) 2

Abstained – 1

 

It was resolved that the application was APPROVED

8.

Garages To The Rear Of 1-12 Gloucester Gardens, Golders Green Road, NW11 9AA 18/0779/FUL pdf icon PDF 192 KB

Minutes:

Councillor Ryde left the room for this item.

 

The Planning Officer presented the report and addendum to the Committee.

 

Two residents, Ms Susan Birnbaum and Mrs Marijke van Kleeff, spoke in objection to the application.

 

The applicant also addressed the Committee.

 

The vote was recorded as follows:

 

For (approval) – 5

Against (approval) – 0

 

It was resolved that the application was APPROVED.

9.

Oak Lodge, 54 The Bishops Avenue, London N2 0BE 17/6561/FUL pdf icon PDF 514 KB

Minutes:

The Planning Officer presented the report and addendum to the Committee. It was noted that the addendum contained an amended condition.

 

Mr Jeffrey Kagan spoke in objection to the application.

 

The agent for the applicant addressed the Committee.

 

The vote was recorded as follows:

 

For (refusal) – 6

Against (refusal) - 0

 

It was resolved that the application was REFUSED.

 

 

10.

Aston House Cornwall Avenue London N3 1LF 18/1678/FUL pdf icon PDF 734 KB

Minutes:

The Planning Officer presented the report to the Committee.

 

A resident who had registered an objection was not in attendance.

 

The applicant was present but did not speak.

 

The vote was recorded as follows:

 

For (approval) – 0

Against (approval) – 6

 

The Chairman moved to REFUSE the application for the reasons below. This was seconded by Councillors Marshall and Farrier.

 

  1. The proposed development, by reason of its size, siting, bulk and massing, would appear overbearing and visually dominant within the streetscene, to the detriment of the character and appearance of the area. The proposal would be contrary to policy 7.4 of the London Plan, policies CS1 and CS5 of the Barnet Local Plan Core Strategy DPD (2012) and policy DM01 of the Barnet Local Plan Development Management Policies DPD (2012).

 

2.    The proposed development does not include a formal undertaking to submit a full travel plan and monitor its progress, to mitigate the on-street parking impact in the vicinity of the site, contrary to policy CS9 of Barnet's Adopted Core Strategy (2012), policy DM17 of the Adopted Development Management Policies DPD (2012) and the Planning Obligations SPD (2013).

 

The vote was recorded as follows:

 

For (refusal) – 6

Against (refusal) - 0

 

Carried – the application was REFUSED.

 

11.

Land To The Rear Of 1069 Finchley Road, NW11 0PU 18/2056/S73 pdf icon PDF 191 KB

Minutes:

Councillors Ryde and Cohen left the room for this item.

 

The Planning Officer presented the report to the Committee.

 

Mr Banerjee spoke in objection to the application.

 

The Interim Area Planning Manager agreed to check with Enforcement Officers that there were no current enforcement concerns in relation to this application.

 

Victoria Barrett, Planning Agent for applicant, addressed the Committee.

 

The vote was recorded as follows:

 

For (approval) – 4

Against (approval) – 0

 

Resolved – that the application was APPROVED.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

12.

Annexe Land To 765 Finchley Road, Hodford Road, NW11 8DS 17/6370/FUL pdf icon PDF 253 KB

Minutes:

The Planning Officer presented the report to the Committee.

 

A resident who had registered an objection was not in attendance.

 

The architect for the applicant addressed the Committee.

 

For (approval) – 0

Against (approval) - 6

 

The Chairman moved to refuse the application for the reasons below, and was duly seconded by Councillor Ryde:

 

  1. The proposed development, by reason of the design of the houses, would fail to respect the appearance of the surrounding area, to the detriment of the character and appearance of the locality. The proposal would be contrary to policy DM01 of the Barnet Local Plan Development Management Policies DPD (2012), policies CS1 and CS5 of the Barnet Local Plan Core Strategy DPD (2012) and the Residential Design Guidance SPD (2016).
  2. The proposed development, by reason of its size, siting and design, would appear overbearing and visually intrusive, detrimental to the residential amenities of the occupiers of the neighbouring properties. The proposal would be contrary to policy DM01 of the Barnet Local Plan Development Management Policies DPD (2012), policies CS1 and CS5 of the Barnet Local Plan Core Strategy DPD (2012), the Residential Design Guidance SPD (2016) and the Sustainable Design and Construction SPD (2016).

 

 

The vote was recorded as follows:

 

For (refusal) – 6

Against (refusal) – 0

 

Carried – the application was REFUSED.

 

13.

Tudor Court, 2 Crewys Road, NW2 2AA 17/3921/FUL pdf icon PDF 434 KB

Minutes:

Councillor Ryde left the room.

 

The Planning Officer presented the report and addendum to the Committee.

 

Dr James Sun spoke in objection to the application.

 

Mr Mark Carter, Planning Consultant on behalf of applicant, addressed the Committee.

 

Further to a discussion Councillor Farrier moved to DEFER the item to allow a further site visit for clarification. She was seconded by Councillor Schneiderman.

 

The vote was recorded as follows:

 

For (deferral) – 5

Against (deferral) - 0

 

Carried – that the application was DEFERRED.

 

 

 

 

14.

258 Nether Street, N3 1HT 18/0951/FUL pdf icon PDF 776 KB

Minutes:

The Planning Officer presented the report to the Committee.

 

Ms S Roy spoke in objection to the application.

 

The agent for the applicant addressed the Committee.

 

The vote was recorded as follows:

 

For (approval) – 3

Against (approval) – 3

 

The Chairman used her casting vote in favour of the application.

 

Resolved – that the application was APPROVED.

15.

2a Fortis Green Road, N2 9EL 18/0692/S73 pdf icon PDF 237 KB

Minutes:

The Planning Officer presented the report to the Committee.

 

Residents who had registered an objection to the application were not in attendance.

 

The applicant was present but did not address the Committee.

 

The vote was recorded as follows:

 

For (approval) – 6

Against (approval) – 0

 

Resolved – that the application was APPROVED.

16.

994 - 996 High Road, N20 0QG 18/0778/FUL pdf icon PDF 386 KB

Minutes:

The Planning Officer presented the report to the Committee.

 

A resident who had objected to the application was not in attendance.

 

The applicant was present but did not address the Committee.

 

The vote was recorded as follows:

 

For (approval) – 0

Against (approval) 4

Abstained – 2

 

Councillor Schneiderman moved to REFUSE the application for the reasons below and was seconded by Councillor Farrier:

 

The scale, siting and design of the proposed extensions and conversion would create a cramped form of development that would provide poor outlook to habitable rooms. It is deemed that the development would not provide a satisfactory standard of accommodation for future occupants and would detract from the character of this location.  As such, the proposal is contrary to Policies 3.5 and 7.4 of the London Plan 2016, Policies CS1 and CS5 of the Council's Core Strategy DPD (2012), policies DM01 and DM02 of the Development Management Policies DPD (2012) and the Sustainable Design and Construction SPD (2016).

 

The vote was recorded as follows:

 

For (refusal) – 4

Against (refusal) – 0

Abstained – 2

 

Carried – the application was REFUSED.

17.

14-16 The Grove, NW11 9SH 18/1219/FUL pdf icon PDF 1 MB

Minutes:

The Planning Officer presented the report to the Committee.

 

Mr P Smus and Dr C Coleman spoke in objection to the application.

 

Mr Moore, Planning Consultant, spoke on behalf of the applicant.

 

The vote was recorded as follows:

 

For (approval) – 0

Against (approval) – 6

 

Councillor Cohen moved to REFUSE the application for the reasons below. This was seconded by Councillor Marshall:

 

  1. The development, by reason of the size, siting, bulk and design of the proposed extensions would be an overdevelopment of the site and be detrimental to the character and appearance of the property and wider locality.  As such, the proposal is contrary to Policies 3.5 and 7.4 of the London Plan (2016), Policies CS1 and CS5 of the Council's Core Strategy DPD (2012), policy DM01 of the Development Management Policies DPD (2012) and the Residential Design Guidance SPD (2016).
  2. The development, by reason of the size, siting, bulk and design of the proposed extensions, would appear overbearing and detract from the residential amenities of the occupiers of the neighbouring properties. The proposal would be contrary to policy DM01 of the Barnet Local Plan Development Management Policies DPD (2012), policies CS1 and CS5 of the Barnet Local Plan Core Strategy DPD (2012), the Residential Design Guidance SPD (2016) and the Sustainable Design and Construction SPD (2016).

 

The vote was recorded as follows:

 

For (refusal) – 6

Against (refusal) – 0

 

Carried – the application was REFUSED.

 

 

18.

129 The Vale, NW11 8TL 17/8189/FUL pdf icon PDF 785 KB

Minutes:

The Planning Officer presented the report and addendum to the Committee.

 

A resident who had registered an objection to the application was not in attendance.

 

Mr Anthony Adler, Planning Consultant for the applicant, addressed the Committee.

 

The vote was recorded as follows:

 

For (approval) – 3

Against (approval) – 0

Abstained – 3

 

Resolved that the application was APPROVED.

 

 

19.

89 and 91 Highfield Avenue, 18/0034/FUL pdf icon PDF 82 KB

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Planning Officer presented the report and addendum to the Committee. Amended conditions as set out in the addendum were noted.

 

The applicant was present but did not address the Committee.

 

The vote was recorded as follows:

 

For (approval) – 6

Against (approval) – 0

 

Resolved that the application was APPROVED.

20.

142 Pennine Drive London NW2 1NH 18/2245/FUL pdf icon PDF 348 KB

Minutes:

The Planning Officer presented the report to the Committee.

 

The applicant, Mrs Patel, addressed the Committee.

 

The vote was recorded as follows:

 

For (approval) – 0

Against (approval) – 6

 

Councillor Cohen moved to refuse the application for the reasons below, and was duly seconded:

 

The proposed conversion of the single family home into two self-contained flats would not respect the character of the surrounding area which is largely occupied by single family homes. The proposal would be contrary to policies CS1 and CS5 of the Adopted Core Strategy (2012), policy  DM01 of the Adopted Development Management Policies DPD (2012), and the Adopted Residential Design Guidance SPD (2016).

 

The vote was recorded as follows:

 

For (refusal) – 6

Against (refusal) – 0

 

Carried – the application was REFUSED.

21.

40-42 Golders Green Road London NW11 8LL 18/1257/LBC and 18/1256/FUL pdf icon PDF 447 KB

Minutes:

The Planning Officer presented the reports to the Committee.

 

Mr Duncan Craig addressed the Committee on behalf of the applicant.

 

An additional condition was tabled for 18/1256/FUL:

 

Condition 8 a) Before the development hereby permitted is first occupied, details of enclosures and screened facilities for the storage of recycling containers and wheeled refuse bins or other refuse storage containers where applicable, together with a satisfactory point of collection shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

 

b) The development shall be implemented in full accordance with the details as approved under this condition prior to the first occupation and retained as such thereafter.

 

Reason: To ensure a satisfactory appearance for the development and satisfactory accessibility; and to protect the amenities of the area in accordance with policies DM01 of the Adopted Barnet Development Management Policies DPD (2012) and CS14 of the Adopted Barnet Core Strategy DPD (2012).

 

The vote for 18/1257/LBC was recorded as follows:

 

For (approval) – 6

Against (approval) – 0

 

Resolved – that the application was APPROVED.

 

 

The vote for 18/1256/FUL was recorded as follows:

 

For (approval) – 6

Against (approval) – 0

 

Resolved – that the application was APPROVED.

 

22.

Britannia House, 960 High Road, N12 9RY 18/2499/FUL pdf icon PDF 170 KB

Minutes:

The Planning Officer presented the report to the Committee.

 

The applicant was not present.

 

The vote was recorded as follows:

 

For (approval) – 0

Against (approval) – 3

Abstained – 3

 

  1. The proposal provides poor quality amenity space for the occupiers of the proposed flats. This would be contrary to policy DM02 of the Adopted Barnet Development Management Policies (2012), the Sustainable Design and Construction SPD (2016) and the Residential Design Guidance SPD (2016).
  2. The proposal fails to provide a legal undertaking to enable an amendment to the Traffic Regulations Order and contribution towards the associated monitoring costs to mitigate the on-street parking impact in the vicinity of the site, contrary to policy DM17 of the Adopted Development Management Policies DPD (2012), policy CS9 of the Adopted Barnet Core Strategy (2012) and the Planning Obligations SPD (2013).

 

A vote on the above reasons for refusal was recorded as follows:

 

For (refusal) – 3

Against (refusal) – 0

Abstained - 3

23.

Any item(s) the Chairman decides are urgent

Minutes:

None.

 

The meeting closed at 8.35pm.