Issue - meetings

Demolition of 1940s extensions to listed villa & replacement with new single storey extension, repairs to fabric and re-planning of interior; extension of terrace to Archway Road. Provision of new bicycle store and recycling area; removal of specified trees and planting new trees, with new hard and soft landscape.

RECOMMENDATION: Grant permission, subject to conditions and subject to a section 106 Legal Agreement.

The Committee received the application for 225 Archway Road N6 5BS for the demolition of extensions to the listed villa and replacement with single storey extension at 225 Archway Road N6 5BS (pages 109-136 of the agenda pack), the circulated information from local residents objecting to the application and the tabled documents including a letter from Cllrs Allison, Hare and Williams requesting deferral of the application.  The Committee noted that the application differed from that which was refused in April 2011 in that the proposal for a two storey house with lower ground floor had been removed.  An amendment to paragraph 1.1 (page 110) was reported and it was noted that there was in fact a tree preservation order on a cedar tree located at the rear of the site.

The Officer drew the Committee’s attention to the recommendations on Pages 124-125 and highlighted that additional letters from residents at 7, 11 and 13 Southwood Avenue, and a letter signed by a number of local residents had been submitted within the consultation deadline, but not incorporated into the report before circulation, raising concerns including that the development would impact the watercourse running under the land, a full hydrology report should be conducted, concerns about landscaping and future development, impact on wildlife and privacy, overcrowding and exacerbation of parking issues. 

The Committee received the statements of Stephen Robinson (resident of 13 Southwood Avenue) and Jim Dickson (resident 11 Southwood Avenue) objecting to the proposals, including the following points:

• A proper hydrology report should be produced to determine whether the deep excavation and basement development would affect the watercourses running through the site, which would potentially create problems for local residents. Southwood Avenue was already affected by flash flooding after heavy rainfall.
• It had been confirmed that none of the watercourses in the area were Thames Water or Environment Agency assets.
• It was confirmed that Priory Brook ran through Jacksons Lane and another brook ran through Cholmeley Avenue.
• Any future proposals for the site should be in keeping with the design of current properties in the area.

The Committee heard from Cllr Rachel Allison (also on behalf of Cllr Bob Hare) in objection to the proposals, supporting the concerns expressed by other residents and highlighting that the watercourse below the site area had caused her own property to subside.  Cllr Allison suggested evidence that the watercourse had been culverted (drained under the road) be obtained, and that assurance be provided to residents that  the developer will be responsible for any issues caused to the surrounding properties as a result of the watercourse being disturbed.

The Committee noted that the fire brigade had objected to the proposals because of poor accessibility to the basement.  Officers confirmed that the basement was accessible according to building control requirements.

The Committee asked for more information on the watercourse and officers reported that no water streams had been found to be running through the site.  The Officer confirmed that 2 brooks were known to run underground between  ...  view the full minutes text for item 27