Agenda and minutes

RESOLVED that the minutes of the meeting held on 1 April 2021 were approved as an accurate record.

Apologies were received from Councillor Reema Patel who was substituted by Councillor Charlie O-Macauley.

Councillor Roberto Weeden-Sanz declared that he had previously objected to the application in relation to item 7, 46 Watford Way, as such he would not take part in the discussion or the vote of item 7.

None.

Items contained within the addendum were dealt with under individual agenda items. The Committee noted the addendum to the Planning Agenda which was published and circulated prior to the meeting.

The report and addendum were introduced and slides presented by the Planning Officer.

A statement was read to the Committee on behalf of Golders Green Estate Residents Association in objection to the application.

Michael Brodtman, the applicant, addressed the Committee.

Following discussions, the Chairman moved to the vote on the officer’s recommendation.

The votes were recorded as follows:

For (approval) – 6

Against (approval) – 1

Abstained – 0

RESOLVED that the application be APPROVED, subject to conditions as detailed in the report and addendum.

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

Councillor Roberto Weeden-Sanz having declared his previous objection did not take part in the discussion or the vote.

The report was introduced and slides presented by the Planning Officer.

Motti Ifergan addressed the Committee in objection to the application on behalf of the residents.

Councillor Roberto Weeden-Sanz addressed the committee in objection to the application.

Cyril Ogunmakin, the agent, addressed the Committee on behalf of the applicant.

Following discussions, the Chairman moved to the vote on the officer’s recommendation.

The votes were recorded as follows:

For (approval) – 2

Against (approval) – 2

Abstained – 2

As the vote was tied the Chairman used their casting voted and voted in favour of the application. As such the application was approved.

RESOLVED that the application be APPROVED, subject to conditions and s106 as detailed in the report.

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

The report and addendum were introduced and slides presented by the Planning Officer.

John Edwards addressed the Committee in objection to the application on behalf of the residents.

Richard Maltese, the agent, addressed the Committee on behalf of the applicant.

Following discussions, the Chairman moved to the vote on the officer’s recommendation.

The votes were recorded as follows:

For (approval) – 7

Against (approval) – 0

Abstained – 0

RESOLVED that the application be APPROVED, subject to conditions as detailed in the report and addendum.

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

The report and addendum were introduced and slides presented by the Planning Officer.

Ciaran Treanor, the agent, addressed the Committee on behalf of the applicant.

Councillor Weeden-Sanz proposed a landscaping condition as part of the scheme, this was seconded by councillor Schneiderman. The committee voted as follows:

For (approval) – 5

Against (approval) – 1

Abstained – 1

The condition was therefore agreed as follows:

a) A scheme of hard and soft landscaping, including, but not limited to, details of an appropriate tree for the rear garden of each new property, size, species, planting heights, densities and positions of all soft landscaping, shall be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the occupation of the hereby approved development.

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 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 October 2016) and G7 of the London Plan 2021

Informative:

1.     The rear gardens of the properties are fairly constrained with space, the selected tree species should follow ‘right tree, right place’ principles. For example, fruit trees (apple, pears, plum) grown on the correct root stock should provide both visual tree amenity, wildlife benefits and fruit for the family or wildlife. A semi-vigorous root stock (MM106) would allow the trees to grow up to around 5m high at maturity and could be pruned by residents on a regular basis. Other tree species may also be appropriate, they should provide benefits for wildlife. The trees should be planted out at 10/12 cm girth to provide immediate visual amenity. The exact species and variety must be detailed on the landscape plan under Condition above.

2.     Tree and shrub species selected for landscaping/replacement planting provide long term resilience to pest, diseases and climate change. The diverse range of species and variety will help prevent rapid spread of any disease. In addition to this, all trees, shrubs and herbaceous plants must adhere to basic bio-security measures to prevent accidental release of pest and diseases and must follow the guidelines below.

“An overarching recommendation is to follow BS 8545: Trees: From Nursery to independence in the Landscape. Recommendations and that in the interest of Bio-security, trees should not be imported directly from European suppliers and planted  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9.

None.