Agenda item

Construction of 3 x 1 storey dwellings, comprising 1 x 1 bed, 1 x 2 bed and 1 x 3 bed with associated landscaping, car parking and cycle spaces and refuse and recycling store.

RECOMMENDATION: grant permission subject to conditions. 

[Cllr Reith now present. Cllr Mallett absented herself for the duration of discussions on this item].

The Committee considered a report on the application to grant planning permission for the construction of 3 x 1 storey dwellings with associated landscaping, car parking and cycle spaces and refuse store on the land rear of 32A Beaconsfield Road. The report set out details of the proposal, the site and surroundings, planning history, relevant planning policy, consultation and responses, analysis, equalities and human rights implications and recommended to grant permission subject to conditions. The planning officer gave a short presentation highlighting the key aspects of the report.

The Committee’s attention was drawn to three additional proposed conditions for the application which were tabled and which covered tree protection, refuse arrangements and lighting plans for the site.

The Committee raised the following points in discussion of the application;

·        Concerns were expressed regarding the lack of a consultation response received from the London Fire Brigade (LFB) with regards to this backland application. Officers confirmed that the LFB were not statutory consultees and that fire safety issues had been sufficiently addressed under Building Regulations including the provision of underground fire hydrants on the site.

·        Members noted the narrow nature of the site and sought assurances that the measurements on the plans were accurate. Confirmation was provided that officers had cross referenced the plans against OS maps.

·        The designation of the site was queried. Officers confirmed that as no records were held on any lawful use of the land, the site was classified as vacant land as visually it appeared unused for some time. In this regard, the application was considered to have a positive impact on the Conservation Area in terms of bringing the land back into use and securing improvements to boundary treatments.

·        Members expressed concern over the potential impact of the development on nos 30 and 32 Beaconsfield Road located either side of the entrance to the site. Confirmation was provided that the applicant had offered to install insulation measures to help mitigate any noise disturbance caused by vehicles accessing the site.

A number of objectors addressed the Committee and raised the following points:

·        The site was unsuitable for the development proposed due to its narrow nature and the fact that one of the adjacent houses extended above the entrance gateway to the site. 

·        Nos 30 and 32 Beaconsfield Road, located either side of the entrance to the site, would be affected on a daily basis by noise and vibration from traffic entering the development, especially to the bedroom located above the gateway arch.

·        The scheme would result in a loss of privacy to a significant number of neighbouring properties along Beaconsfield and Grove Park Roads whose gardens would back onto the development.

·        Only one of the residential units proposed was family sized which was out of line with demand in the local area.

·        Development on ‘greenfield’ land should not be acceptable in a Conservation Area. In addition, any construction on the site would have a detrimental effect on wildlife habitats.

·        The accuracy of the plans provide by the applicant in setting out the distance of the scheme to neighbouring boundaries was questioned.

·        The objectors felt that the applicant had not made any attempt to consult or engage with neighbouring properties in developing the plans.

Cllrs Vanier and Diakides addressed the Committee and supported the points made by the objectors, in particular that the site was inappropriate for the development proposed due to its narrow nature and was not comparable to other backland developments approved in the borough due to the residential unit above the entrance gateway. Concerns were expressed that the development would cause significant disturbance to neighbouring properties by virtue of the close proximity. The rationale of developing on defacto open land was also questioned.

The applicant addressed the Committee and raised the following points:

·        The applicant had owned the site for 19 years and for 10 of those years it had been used as a breakers yard and for storage and as such could not be considered open ‘greenfield’ land.

·        Council officers had confirmed that the land met the requirements for development.

·        The new residential units would benefit the local area in providing additional housing.

·        The applicant was willing to pay for a noise assessment for 32 Beaconsfield Road and to provide insulation as required to the rooms located over the archway to mitigate any noise disturbance.

·        A 1.8m fence was proposed for the site boundary which would provide privacy to neighbouring gardens.

·        No works were proposed to existing trees on site and additional planting was planned.

Cllr Reith proposed a motion, which was subsequently carried, and it was

RESOLVED

·        That planning application HGY/2013/1777 be rejected on the grounds that development should not be permitted in a Conservation Area; concerns over the loss of privacy and noise disturbance to 32 Beaconsfield Road and that the scheme would overall have a negative impact on the residential amenity.

• The proposal would constitute an unsatisfactory form of backland development which is out of character with the existing form of development in the conservation area.  This would give rise to an unacceptable relationship between the existing pattern of development and the proposal to the detriment of adjacent properties particularly and the amenity of the area generally contrary to National Planning Policy Framework March 2012, Policies 3.5, 7.4, 7.6 and 7.8 of the London Plan 2011, Policies SP11 and SP12 of the Haringey Local Plan 2013, Saved Policy UD3 of the Haringey Unitary Development Plan 2006 and Haringey’s draft SPG3c Backlands Development 2006.

• The proposal involves the development of a back-land site in a manner which would result in unacceptable overlooking and noise and disturbance to existing nearby properties which in turn would overlook the proposed development, leading to a serious loss of privacy and noise impacts to all occupants in the vicinity contrary to National Planning Policy Framework March 2012, Policy7.6 of the London Plan 2011, Policy SP11 of the Haringey Local Plan 2013, Saved Policy UD3 of the Haringey Unitary Development Plan 2006 and Haringey’s draft SPG3c Backlands Development 2006.