Agenda and minutes

RESOLVED that the minutes of the meeting held on 7^th January 2021 were approved.

None.

Cllr Danny Rich declared a non-pecuniary interest by virtue of the fact that a close relative lives in Hollickwood Road (Item 8).

None.

The addendum was noted. Items in the addendum would be dealt with under individual agenda items.

Oakleigh

The Committee received the report and addendum.

Mr Guy Braithwaite, Dr David Massam and Cllr Sachin Rajput addressed the committee in objection to the application.

Mr Simon Wallis, agent for the applicant, addressed the committee.

The Chairman moved to the vote on the officer’s recommendation:

For (approval) – 0

Against (approval) - 7

Cllr Richman moved a motion to REFUSE the application on the grounds that the building would have a harmful effect on the character and appearance of the area, contrary to policies as listed by the Inspector, and that the application conflicts with the recently-awarded local listing.

The motion was seconded by Cllr Rich. The Chairman moved to a vote on the motion:

For (refusal) – 7

Against (refusal) - 0

CARRIED – it was resolved that the application was REFUSED for the following reasons:

1.     The proposed development would result in the loss of a locally listed building of heritage value and by reason of its  excessive height, scale and massing, the replacement building would constitute an incongruous and visually dominant form of development on this corner plot that would fail to respect and respond to the adjoining streetscenes and context of both Lyonsdown Road and Richmond Road in particular. The proposal would be contrary to Policies 3.4, 3.5, 7.4, 7.6 and 7.8 of the London Plan (2016), Policies CS NPPF, CS1 and CS5 of the Local Plan Core Strategy (Adopted 2012) and Policies DM01 and DM06 of the Development Management Policies DPD (Adopted 2012).

2.     The application does not include a formal undertaking to secure an adequate contribution to affordable housing provision to meet the demand for such housing in the area. The application is therefore unacceptable and contrary to Policies 3.12 and 3.13 of the London Plan (2016), Policies CS NPPF, CS4, CS15 of the Barnet Local Plan Core Strategy, Policies DM01, DM02, DM10 of the Development Management Policies Document (both adopted September 2012), the Barnet Planning Obligations (adopted April 2013) and Affordable Housing (adopted February 2007 and including subsequent amendments) Supplementary Planning Documents, and the Mayoral  Affordable Housing and Viability SPG (adopted August 2017).

3.     The proposed development does not include a formal undertaking to meet the costs of the required carbon off-set provision. The proposal would therefore not address the impacts of the development, contrary to Policy 5.2 of the London Plan (2016), Policy CS13 of Barnet's Local Plan Core Strategy (2012) and Policy DM04 of the Barnet's Adopted Development Management Policies Document DPD (2012).

Mill Hill

The planning officer presented the report.

Representations were heard from Mr Robert Cowan and Mr Leon Malekzad in objection to the application.

The Chairman moved to a vote on the officer’s recommendation:

For (approval) – 5

Against (approval) – 1

Abstained – 1

RESOLVED that the application was approved subject to conditions as per the officer’s report.

Coppetts Ward

The planning officer presented the report.

A representation in objection to the application was heard from Dr Oliver Natelson.

The agent for the applicant, Mr Joe Henry, addressed the committee.

The Chairman moved to a vote on the officer’s recommendation:

For (approval) – 5

Against (approval) – 0

Abstained – 2

RESOLVED that the application was approved subject to the conditions set out in the officer’s report.

East Barnet Ward

The planning officer presented the report and addendum.

Cllr Geof Cooke addressed the committee in objection to the application.

Mr Bastami, agent for the applicant addressed the committee.

A motion was moved by Cllr Sargeant to defer the application to obtain information in relation to the purchase of the site. This was seconded by Cllr Rich.

The Chairman moved to a vote on the motion:

For (deferral) – 3

Against (deferral) – 4

The Chairman moved to the vote on the planning officers’ recommendation:

For (approval) – 4

Against (approval) – 3

RESOLVED that the application was approved as per the agenda and amended recommendation set out in the addendum.

West Finchley

The planning officer presented the report and addendum.

The Chairman moved to a vote on the officer’s recommendation:

For (approval) – 7

RESOLVED that the application was APPROVED as per the agenda with an amendment to the description as set out in the addendum