Issue - meetings

Proposal: Remodelling and extension to existing church. Demolition and replacement of existing hall on church site with new community facility / nursery. Proposed 22 new build residential units to church site and 10 new build residential units to Acacia Avenue site with a mix of 1, 2, 3, and 4 bedroom accommodation over 2 - 4 storeys.

Recommendation: grant permission subject to conditions and section 106 Legal Agreement.

RESOLVED that the decision be deferred to a later date to allow for further consideration of the design.

The Committee considered a report on the application to grant planning permission for remodelling and extension to existing church; demolition and replacement of existing hall on church site with new community facility / nursery; proposed 22 new build residential units to church site and 10 new build residential units to Acacia Avenue site with a mix of 1, 2, 3 and 4 bedroom accommodation over 2-4 storeys.

The Planning Officer gave a short presentation highlighting the key aspects of the report. 

In response to the presentation, the Committee raised a number of questions and issues:

-           In relation to the London Fire Brigade, the Committee asked whether there were still issues with access.  Officers confirmed that there had since been an exchange of drawings with access arrangements, and the London Fire Brigade were content with the proposals.

-           The Committee were concerned that the Quality Review Panel had not seen the plans for the Acacia Avenue properties, and officers confirmed that whilst this had been the case, the applicants had met with the Council’s Design Officer on two occasions, and therefore, the Council supported the application.

-           Some Committee Members raised issues with elements of the design of the buildings and the layout, for example, the use of different coloured bricks, and the building heights as seen from Great Cambridge Road.  Officers informed the Committee that the slides did not show the elevations of the buildings very well, and that the only buildings which would be visible from the main road would be the church and the two properties either side.  Officers also considered that the design was good.  Members suggested that the application would benefit from further discussion at the Quality Review Panel.

Councillor Carroll moved that the application be deferred back to the Quality Review Panel.  The Committee voted and it was:

RESOLVED that the decision be deferred to a later date to allow for further consideration of the design.