Agenda item

Proposal: Erection of three buildings to provide 11 residential dwellings, amenity space, greening, cycle parking and associated works

 

Roland Sheldon, Deputy Team Manager, introduced the application for erection of three buildings to provide 11 residential dwellings, amenity space, greening, cycle parking and associated works.

 

The following was noted in response to questions from the committee:

 

· The report details which trees would be removed had been selected and this had been reviewed by the Council's tree officer and considered to be acceptable.

 

· The daylight/sunlight assessment had been updated. . As part of the assessment, it was found that there were three windows that were marginally below the vertical sky component guideline. When officers assessed the room the windows served against the no skyline assessment, it comfortably exceeded the BRE guidelines.

 

· In regard to the location of the bin store, officers looked at the drag distances for waste operatives to go into the site. It was important to balance this up against the distance that residents would have to travel to put the bins in. o · T Ongoing maintenance of the bin store in the interest of residnts’/neighbours’ amenity would be ensured through amending the wording of condition 19, if members were minded to grant planning permission. · In terms of the potential for overshadowing, e officers reviewed the scheme and did not raise any concerns in relation to Courtyard House. In terms of the play area, this was a scheme for 11 homes, and this not being open to the public, and the play area wouldn't be to a scale that would give rise to concerns about an unacceptable noise disturbance.

 

· There would be 7 trees being removed, there were 3 trees that were approved to be removed in the previous scheme that were also being removed here. There were also some trees that had to be removed to facilitate the development; officers tried to work with the developer to minimise the number of trees that would be removed.

 

Marc Prevezer attended the committee to speak in objection of the application:

 

This scheme was high density, out of keeping with the whole street, harmful to neighbouring amenity, and would result in loss of light , there was also a lack of consultation with residents.

 

Lesley Reynolds attended the committee to speak in objection of the application:

 

If approved this development would replace a scenic outlook with a large imposing brick wall and parking was already dire in the area. In summary, residents urged the committee to recognise the overwhelming evidence of overdevelopment, the negative impact on existing residents and the inadequacy of proposed mitigations. The scheme in its current form was simply not suitable.

The following was noted in response to questions to the objectors:

 

· The terraces were stepped and the closest one to the street was 3.9 metres and the farthest one was five metres from the back of pavement.

 

· Residents explained that they felt there was zero direct consultation with the developers and had asked them on numerous occasions through their agents to come down to the site and discuss the objections to avoid any potential legal issues.

 

The applicant responded to the objectors:

 

The applicant was fully committed to delivering this scheme and subject to planning permission would intend to start works as early as next spring if possible. Since they acquired the site in 2023, they had redeveloped proposals for 11x3 bed and 4x4 bed family homes which directly addressed some of the original feedback from both residents and stakeholders.

 

They had worked closely with officers during that period with statutory consultees and the local community to ensure the new homes were both fully compliant with policy, but also sympathetic to the local architecture and the conservation area. The landscaping strategy provided green amenity space, including private terraces and rear gardens, a shared community garden and informal play area, and with 30 new trees being planted, which represented an overall net gain of 23 trees across the site. They had engaged with the local community and officers, including meetings with the Highgate Society, the Conservation Area Advisory Committee and neighbours, and the feedback had been instrumental in shaping the scheme.

 

There were two initial consultations which all neighbours were invited to and since then there been several exchanges over e[1]mail with various neighbours who've engaged to our communications consultants.

 

The following was noted in response to questions to the applicant:

 

· In terms of the greening to the side wall facing onto the garden of 280 Inwood Road, neighbours had mentioned a living green wall. Green walls were notoriously difficult to establish and maintain, they had to also bear in mind that this wouldn't be on a commercially managed property, it would be attached to the side of a private house which would be sold within its own freehold.

 

· The bin store would have a solid roof which would also be comprised of a green roof. There would be a condition regarding maintenance.

 

· Neighbour correspondence was sent to over 150 surrounding addresses, notifying the local community of the launch of the consultation, providing contact details for any inquiries, there were two meetings with local community stakeholders, the Highgate Society and the Highgate Conservation Area Advisory Committee, - online and in person, which all neighbours were invited to.

The Chair asked Catherine Smyth, Head of Development Management and Planning Enforcement to sum up the recommendation as set out in the report. Condition 19, relating to the Delivery and Servicing Plan and Waste Management Plan would be amended to ensure ongoing maintenance of the bin store .

 

The Chair moved that the recommendation be approved following 3 absentions, 7 in favour and 0 objections.

 

RESOLVED

 

2.1 That the Committee resolve to GRANT planning permission and that the Head of Development Management and Planning Enforcement or the Director of Planning & Building Standards is authorised to issue the planning permission and impose conditions and informatives subject to signing of a section 106 Legal Agreement providing for the obligations set out in the Heads of Terms below

 

2.2 That delegated authority be granted to the Head of Development Management and Planning Enforcement or the Director Planning & Building Standards to make any alterations, additions or deletions to the recommended heads of terms and/or recommended conditions as set out in this report and to further delegate this power provided this authority shall be exercised in consultation with the Chair (or in their absence the Vice-Chair) of the Sub-Committee.

 

2.3 That the section 106 legal agreement referred to in resolution (2.1) above is to be completed no later than 31 October 2025 or within such extended time as the Head of Development Management and Planning Enforcement or the Director Planning, Building Standards and Sustainability shall in her/his sole discretion allow; and

 

2.4 That, following completion of the agreement(s) referred to in resolution (2.1) within the time period provided for in resolution (2.3) above, planning permission be granted in accordance with the Planning Application subject to the attachment of the conditions.

 

Conditions Summary – Planning Application HGY/2024/2168 (full text of conditions - Appendix 01).

1) Time Limit (Compliance)

2) Approved Plans and Documents (Compliance)

3) Materials (Prior to commencement of relevant part)

4) Design and Detailing (Prior to commencement of relevant part)

5) Boundary treatment and access control (Pre-occupation)

6) Landscaping (Prior to commencement of relevant part)

7) Biodiversity (Pre-commencement)

8) Lighting (Pre-occupation)

9) Screening Planting (Pre-occupation)

10) Noise from building services plant and vents (Compliance)

11) Secure by Design Accreditation (Pre-above ground works)

12) Secured by Design Certification (Pre-occupation)

13) Drainage and SUDS Strategy (Compliance)

14) Piling Method Statement (Pre-commencement)

15) Land Contamination (Pre-commencement)

16) Unexpected contamination (If identified)

17) NRMM (Pre-commencement)

18) Management and Control of Dust (Pre-commencement)

19) Delivery and Servicing and Waste Management Plan (Pre-occupation)

20) Construction Logistics and Management Plan (Pre-commencement)

21) Considerate Constructors (Compliance)

22) Energy Strategy (Pre-above ground works)

23) Overheating (Pre-above ground works)

24) Urban Greening Factor (Compliance)

25) Water Butts (Pre-occupation)

26) Arboricultural Method Statement (Compliance)

27) Cycle Parking (pre-occupation)

28) Electric Vehicle Charging (Pre-occupation)

29) Accessible Parking Bay (Pre-commencement)

30) Car Parking Management Plan (Pre-occupation)

31) Waste/Recycling Storage (Prior to commencement of relevant part)

32) Restriction to Telecommunications Apparatus (Restriction)

33) Building Regulations Part M (Compliance)

34) Removal of Permitted Development Rights (Restriction)

35) Water consumption