Agenda item

RECOMMENDATION:

That the Head of Development Management be authorised to GRANT planning permission subject to conditions

WARD: Grange Park

Ms L Lewis, Senior Planning Officer, introduced the report, highlighting the key aspects of the application.

The officer emphasised, following concerns, that there were not proposals to change the front elevation, except possibly for the garage doors.

A deputation was received from Leila Mann, a Planning Consultant, who spoke on behalf of a local resident, against the officers’ recommendation. She asked that the committee follow the analysis of an inspector on a recently dismissed appeal at Hoppers Rd, Winchmore Hill, and refuse the application.

Another deputation was received from Cllr Andy Milne, Grange Park Ward Councillor, who spoke against the officers’ recommendation.

The agent, Mr Gavin Henneberry, spoke in response.

Officers responded to comments and questions, including in respect of parking standards. Officers explained that many of the issues raised would be resolved/ secured through conditions. Officers expressed that the application would not result in substantial conservation harm, and cycle storage and EV parking could be accommodated.

In response to Member’s queries regarding the rear extension, officers advised that the rear of the house was already staggered at two different levels, and the extension was filling in part of what was already set back; they also confirmed that a condition to incorporate Sustainable Drainage System (SuDS) was in place.

In response to Member’s queries regarding refuse, officers advised that the bin store would accommodate 8 bins, with garden waste bins being kept at the rear of the property; and a ramp provided access for collection, as well as wheelchair access. The officer confirmed that there was sufficient amenity space to comply with policy, and the front elevation would not be changing, with the potential exception of the garage doors.

In response to Member’s queries regarding ventilation, officers advised that a condition had been attached, and it was possible to achieve suitable ventilation without affecting the front external appearance of the building; it was also confirmed that the premises was not in a CPZ area.

Members had ongoing concerns with regards to overdevelopment, resident living conditions, ventilation, refuse, accessibility, potential damage to the conservation area, a lack of detail in the report, and parking.

The Head of Development Management provided advise on potential reasons for refusal.

Cllr Rye proposed a countermotion, that planning permission be refused, on the grounds of: turning a family unit into four units, which is unsustainable; harm to the conservation area in the form of hard standing; and providing units that are compromised in terms of standards, relating to: height, ventilation, and two units having amenity space/ gardens that are not directly accessible. This was seconded by Cllr Chamberlain.

This proposal, having been put to the vote; Members voted:

4 FOR

6 AGAINST

1 ABSTENTION

and so, this countermotion was not passed.

The original officer’s recommendation, having been put to the vote; Members voted:

5 FOR

4 AGAINST

2 ABSTENTIONS

and so, it was AGREED:

That the Head of Development Management be authorised to GRANT planning permission subject to the conditions set out in the report.