Agenda item

Demolition of side and rear extensions. Conversion of part ground, first and second floors into 4 flats and erection of 10 houses at the rear of the site with associated access road, parking spaces and landscaping.

RECOMMENDATION: grant permission subject to conditions and subject to a s106 legal agreement.

[Cllr Newton returned to sitting on the Committee]

The Committee considered a report on the application to grant planning permission for the demolition of side and rear extensions, conversion of part ground, first and second floors into four flats and the erection of 10 houses at the rear of the site. 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 and subject to a s106 legal agreement.

The planning officer gave a short presentation highlighting the key aspects of the report. The Committee’s attention was drawn to a tabled addendum report setting out three additional conditions.

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

·         It was requested that determination of the application be deferred until a further site visit could be undertaken to the billiard (or pool) room in the listed building which had not been possible at the previous visit. It was considered that the room should not be demolished to permit access to the development as although located in one of the extensions, the room was part of the historic character of the building. English Heritage had indicated that they would revisit their assessment of the room given the opportunity for further access. The application failed to consider alternative access routes in order to preserve this room.  

·         The application was not comprehensive and constituted a cramped, opportunistic design that didn’t do justice to the site.

·         Access from the upper floor units directly onto the access road to the rear units would be dangerous for pedestrians.

·         The development would exacerbate congestion in the area by generating additional access points exiting onto Bruce Grove, a busy red route area.

·         There was agreement that the listed building required renovation but that the design proposed under the application was not good enough.

·         The noise assessment undertaken for the Conservative Club had been undertaken outside of the football season which was when the bulk of events were held and was therefore misleading.

·         No details of the representation from TfL had been included within the agenda pack.

Members sought clarification regarding the standing of the billiard room. The conservation officer confirmed that she had visited the room and was unaware of the assertion that English Heritage would revisit their representation should access be granted. It was considered that the ancilliary extension which contained the billiard room made limited contribution to the Listed Building and therefore demolition was considered acceptable.

Elucidation was sought on whether a representation had been received from TfL following conflicting detail within the report. The transport team identified that they did not have any concerns with the scheme following their assessment of the application and confirmed that no representation had been received from TfL. The access road complied with the Manual for Streets and would permit access by emergency vehicles.

The applicant’s representatives addressed the Committee and raised the following points:

·         The scheme would help to deliver new homes and regenerate the area as well as restore a listed building and utilise redundant land to the rear.

·         The removal of the extensions would not cause harm to the listed building.

·         Parking would be provided onsite only for the family size units.

·         The design proposed was high quality and fairly low density.

·         The applicant had consulted TfL on 5 June and who had raised no objection to the application.

·         The acoustic assessment identified the need for improvements to sound insulation and which would comply with the standards imposed for residential properties located above licensed premises. 

Cllr Ejiofor addressed the Committee as a local ward Councillor and raised the following points:

·         The floors above the Conservative Club were not currently in residential use.

·         The scheme would constitute overdevelopment of the site, resulting in a very narrow access road.

·         Access onto Bruce Grove would be unsafe including vehicles having to traverse the pavement.

·         The scheme should be rejected on the grounds of unsafe access, lack of compliance with space standards, lack of affordable housing provision and concerns regarding fire vehicle access.

·         Although development was needed of the site, this application was not appropriate.

The Chair put forward a motion to defer the application due to uncertainty on the submission of a representation from TfL and concerns over traffic access in a busy red route area and as such whether the development should be car free. Clarification could also be sought as to whether English Heritage would reassess the application. Cllr Rice requested a second site visit before the rehearing and that if possible the applicant try to clear debris from the site to allow Members to see the building more clearly. The motion was carried at a vote and it was

RESOLVED

·         To defer application HGY/2014/1041 to a future meeting.