Agenda item

Demolition of existing building and erection of part four / part five storey building comprising community clinic at ground floor level and 2 x one bed, 4 x two bed and 3 x three bed flats above with 9 car parking spaces, bicycle store, refuse space and private amenity space (Amended Scheme).      

RECOMMENDATION: Grant permission subject to Section 106 Legal Agreement.          

 

The Committee were advised that the application site was located on Fortis Green, which was situated off Fortis Green Road.  The site was located on the road that lay between East Finchley and Muswell Hill.  Part of the site was on Spring Lane, the site was also situated in the Muswell Hill Conservation Area.  Presently the site was a two-storey detached redundant Health Clinic built in the early 70’s.  Adjacent to the site was Twyford Court - a residential block comprising of three-storeys plus mansard roof.  Opposite the site are more residential buildings named ‘The Gables’ that comprises of three-storeys.  To the rear of the site were Firemans cottages of single family dwelling houses comprising of three-storeys.

 

The Committee were advised that an application for demolition of existing building and erection of a part four/part five storey building comprising of clinic at ground floor level, 6 x 3 bed and 3 x 2 bed flats with 10 parking spaces, bicycle store, refuse and private amenity space, was refused on the 24/01/2008 and was the subject of appeal as yet not determined.

 

The Committee were informed that the proposal was for the demolition of the existing clinic building and erection of a four storey building with community clinic on the ground floor and 2 x 1 bed, 4 x 2 bed and 3 x 3 bed.  The proposal also included 9 off-street car parking spaces, a bicycle store and 180m² of private amenity space and 90m² private space on the roof.  The proposed building would comprise of a clinic and lobby area on the ground floor, on the first floor there are 4 units, 2 x 1 bed, 1 x 2 bed and 1 x 3 bed flats.  The proposed second floor would have three units 1 x 3 bed, 2 x 2 bed and the third floor two more units 1 x 3 bed and 1 x 2 bed.  The proposed building would have two entrances on the ground floor, one for the residential units and one for the clinic.  The proposed materials would be red brick to match the local brickwork with double glazed aluminium framed windows, with some stone detailing and façade.

 

 

A Local Residents addressed the Committee and objected to the application on the basis that:

 

• that the size of the development was large for the site in question, the development should be set back from the road further than intended
• that if the application were permitted then the planned design of the south west corner would require redesigning so as to have a curbed effect
• there was no apparent safe guards to the proposed roof terrace and the terrace would be visible from the street and seen by people walking or sitting on a bus, and also conditions needed to be imposed as regards barbecues and the hanging of washing on the proposed roof terrace or balconies
• the proposed community clinic required explanation of exactly what its function would be, and whether the proposed area (123 sq metres) was adequate for this
• the ground floor lobby area needed to be retained
• that the Committee defer consideration pending a site visit.

 

The Committee then heard from the applicant’s representative (the Architect for the scheme) who advised the Committee:

 

• that this was a resubmitted application following the previous application being refused under officer’s delegated authority, and following previous refusal the applicant had made considerable modifications and this was a revised application
• the application had been reduced from 5 to 4 storeys and that it had been set back in line with the existing buildings
• the glazing to the building had been reduced by approx 40% and the design had been alter to fit with the contemporary design of the adjacent and surrounding residential accommodation
• that stone banding had been added to the design
• the community clinic proposal was not solely for use as a doctor’s surgery but could developed as a dental or other similar facility

 

The Committee then viewed the plans.

 

The Chair, having ascertained that there were no questions to the objector from the Committee, asked if there were any questions for the applicant.

 

The Committee sought clarification from the applicant’s representative in respect of the numbers of proposed cycle spaces being adequate, and whether there was any room for increasing the provision. The Committee also questioned the fencing proposed on the roof garden and its proposed height of 1 metre and whether this was adequate and that where children were concerned it was not. In response the Committee were advised that the parapet surrounding the roof terrace was approx 700 mm and the fencing would be atop this – making a total of 1100mm.

 

In responding to further points of clarification the Committee were advised that the brown roof would consist of a roof rock garden which would be better for wild life/fauna and it would be a low density design too.  There was sufficient strength in the roofing, and it would be possible to be able to develop a bio diversable roof rock garden which would be self developing and sustainable.  In response to further points of clarification the Committee were advised that the wall on the right hand side would also be retained and repointed.

 

There being no further questions the Chair thanked the applicant.

 

The Committee commented on the planning condition CW2 and the issue of the loss of the former clinic and the proposed usage, and that there needed to be some ascertaining of what would happen to this space, as it could very well be lost as a result of there being no suitable medical or community usage, and that these issues needed to be policed in order to ensure that the space did not return to flat usage. The Committee also asked to have clarified what other uses could the space be used for under D1 besides usage as a dental facility.  The Committee cited the former New River facility that had been earmarked as a Doctor’s surgery but when approached the PCT had advised that the facility was too small and therefore not interested, and that if the Committee were not mindful to raise this issue then the space could easily loss to community operation/usage.

 

In response officers advised that the planning authority had included a condition that the ground floor site be retained for community usage and that could insist the ground floor being retained for community usage such as a dentist or other medical type facility, or else a small day nursery although there may be issues space requirements for a nursery facility. However it would be for the applicant to secure community usage but the planning authority did not have powers to stop the PCT from selling land.

 

The Committee commented in respect of various aspects of the proposed development and whether conditions or informatives could be added in respect of:

 

• the proposed brown/green roof garden proposals being examined by the Council’s Nature Conservation Officer to ascertain sustainability and bio diversity;
• that the development have some additional landscaping with possibly bigger tree species in the garden areas;
• that there be some type of condition in relation to barbeques and washing not being permitted on balconies or the roof terrace together with clear rules for the roof’s usage
• the use of brick brown red colour similar to that used in the area

 

In response officers advised that the green/brown roof rock facility development could be in the form of an informative in terms of how it meets sustainability.  The tree type and size would also be in the form of an informative and that the tree type etc was covered under condition 7 proposed, as was condition 6 in relation to the correct red brick colour.  In terms of the roof terrace barrier it would be appropriate to request details of materials for this as some screens were often opaque.  The issue of barbecues and the hanging of washing could also be addressed as part of the roof conditions.

 

Further comments were stated from the Committee in terms of the imposing of conditions for roof usage, and whether this would extend further into telling people what could or could not be planted.

 

The Chair then MOVED and it was unanimously:

 

RESOLVED

 

That the application be granted subject to conditions and subject to the completion of a Section 106 Agreement to secure an education contribution of £45,382 and an administration costs contribution of £2269.00.

 

INFORMATION RELATING TO APPLICATION REF: HGY/2008/0499

FOR PLANNING COMMITTEE DATED 09/06/2008

 

Location: 150 Fortis Green N10 3PA

 

Proposal: Demolition of existing building and erection of part four / part five storey building comprising community clinic at ground floor level and 2 x one bed, 4 x two bed and 3 x three bed flats above with 9 car parking spaces, bicycle store, refuse space and private amenity space (AMENDED SCHEME).

 

Recommendation: GTD

 

Decision: GTD

 

Drawing No’s: PL.08.689.01 - 11 incl, 15 - 20 incl.

 

Conditions:

 

1. The development hereby authorised must be begun not later than the expiration of 3 years from the date of this permission, failing which the permission shall be of no effect.

Reason: This condition is imposed by virtue of the provisions of the Planning & Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 and to prevent the accumulation of unimplemented planning permissions.

 

2. The development hereby authorised shall be carried out in complete accordance with the plans and specifications submitted to, and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, in particular amended plans received 8th May 2008 PL.08.689.07, 09, 11, 15,16, 17, 18, 19B.

Reason: In order to ensure the development is carried out in accordance with the approved details and in the interests of amenity.

 

3. A detailed plan shall be submitted to and approved in writing to the Local Authority to show that a 10 metre-long servicing vehicle can reverse onto the proposed parking area from the Northern end of Spring Lane.

Reason: In order to ensure that the majority of the servicing to this development is contained within the site.

 

4. A detailed scheme for the provision of storage facilities for seperate refuse for ground floor clinic/community use and residential shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of the work for the following domestic refuse and recycling containers: 2 x 1100 litre refuse bins, 1 x 1100 recycling bin.

Reason: In order to protect the amenities of the locality.

 

5. The construction works of the development hereby granted shall not be carried out before 0800 or after 1800 hours Monday to Friday or before 0800 or after 1200 hours on Saturday and not at all on Sundays or Bank Holidays.

Reason: In order to ensure that the proposal does not prejudice the enjoyment of neighbouring occupiers of their properties.

 

6. Notwithstanding the description of the materials in the application, no development shall be commenced until precise details of the materials to be used in connection with the development hereby permitted have been submitted to, approved in writing by and implemented in accordance with the requirements of the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: In order to retain control over the external appearance of the development in the interest of the visual amenity of the area.

 

7. Notwithstanding the details of landscaping referred to in the application, a scheme for the landscaping and treatment of the surroundings of the proposed development to include detailed drawings of:

 

a.    Those new trees and shrubs to be planted together with a schedule of species shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of the development.  Such an approved scheme of planting, seeding or turfing comprised in the approved details of landscaping shall be carried out and implemented in strict accordance with the approved details in the first planting and seeding season following the occupation of the building or the completion of development (whichever is sooner).  Any trees or plants, either existing or proposed, which, within a period of five years from the completion of the development die, are removed, become damaged or diseased shall be replaced in the next planting season with a similar size and species.  The landscaping scheme, once implemented, is to be maintained and retained thereafter to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: In order for the Local Authority to assess the acceptability of any landscaping scheme in relation to the site itself, thereby ensuring a satisfactory setting for the proposed development in the interests of the visual amenity of the area.

 

8. Notwithstanding the Provisions of Article 4 (1) and part 25 of Schedule 2 of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995, no individual satellite antenna shall be erected or installed on any building hereby approved. The proposed development shall have a central dish or aerial system for receiving all broadcasts for the residential units created: details of such a scheme shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority prior to the occupation of the property, and the approved scheme shall be implemented and permanently retained thereafter.

Reason: In order to prevent the proliferation of satellite dishes on the development.

 

9. The  car parking spaces shown on the approved drawings shall be marked out on the site to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority, and these spaces shall thereafter be kept continuously available for car parking and shall not be used for any other purpose without the prior permission in writing of the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: In order to ensure that adequate provision for car parking is made within the site.

 

10. The ground floor clinic/community use shall be perminently retained as such.

Reason: In order to compensate for the loss of the existing clinic/community use on the site.

 

REASONS FOR APPROVAL:

 

The proposal should be approved on the grounds that it provides a block with suitable dwelling mixes providing a range of units from one bedroom flats up to 3 bedroom flats and is within an acceptable density range.  The proposed four/three storey block has little impact on the residential amenities of any surrounding property and has a design that is practical within the context of the Muswell Hill Conservation Area.  The proposal provides adequate car-parking with private amenity space and a separate area for the provisions of refuse.  In addition the proposal provides 123m2  of clinic floorspace that goes someway to retaining the existing community health facility compliant with policies UD3 General Principles, UD4 Quality Design, CSV5 Alterations and Extensions in Conservation Areas, HSG1 New Housing Developments, CW2 Protecting Existing Communities, SPG3a Density, Dwelling Mix, Floorspace Minima, Conversions, Extensions and Lifetime Homes and SPG2 Conservation & Archaeology of the Haringey Unitary Development Plan.

 

INFORMATIVE: The new development will require naming / numbering. The applicant should contact the Transportation Group at least six weeks before the development is occupied (tel. 020 8489 5573) to arrange for the allocation of a suitable address.

 

INFORMATIVE: The necessary works to construct the crossover will be carried out by the Assistant Director Street Scene at the applicants expense once all the necessary internal site works have been completed. The applicant should telephone 020 8489 1316 to obtain a cost estimate and to arrange for the works to be carried out.

 

Section 106 Yes