Agenda and minutes

In accordance with the Council’s Constitution, Members are asked to declare any personal or prejudicial interest they may have in any matter which is to be considered at this meeting.

None.

Agreed, subject to the inclusion of Councillor Justice’s apologies.

The Development Management Manager, Regeneration and Economic Development, presented the report relating to the application.

The applicant was present and stated that the purpose of the development was to provide a more private living space for his mother and occasionally, family visitors.

After discussion, it was agreed to refuse planning permission for erection of part single/part two storey side extension in connection with conversion of property into 2 one bedroom flats, for the following reason:

1. The proposed development would result in the loss of a three-bedroom dwelling which is considered to contribute towards family housing stock and is contrary to LDF Policy BC4.  

The Development Management Manager, Regeneration and Economic Development, presented the report relating to the application.

Members asked questions of the officer and raised concerns regarding aspects of the application including the lack of a travel plan, the size of the outdoor play area for the proposed nursery and the consideration that the proposed use was not of an industrial or commercial nature.

The applicant’s representative was present and raised the following points in support of the application:

• The officer’s report is a fair and balanced one
• If granted permission, the applicant would provide the community with a Church hall, a nursery school, a youth centre and training workshops
• The applicant anticipates that most of its users would be from the African community, but would welcome people of any origin
• The freeholder of the building has been trying to sell the premises for a long time and has not received any enquiries relating to industrial or commercial use
• If this application were not approved, it is likely that the building would be demolished, which would be a negative step
• Members’ concerns regarding a travel plan and the size of the children’s play area could be addressed by way of conditions
• The proposed development would generate approximately 52 jobs

After discussion, it was agreed to grant planning permission for the mixed use of premises as a place of worship and for community, education and training purposes with ancillary offices and construction of front entrance to first floor, subject to the following conditions:

1. Notwithstanding the details of vehicular parking and circulation shown on drawing no. 2907/6, an amended scheme for the parking and circulation area to the front of the building shall be submitted for the approval of the local planning authority within three months of the date of this planning permission. The scheme shall, amongst other things, make provision for a larger outdoor play area for the nursery and avoid potential traffic hazard on the A13. The scheme as approved shall be implemented and available for use within three months from the date of written approval by the local planning authority. The parking and circulation area shall thereafter be permanently retained for the accommodation of vehicles of occupiers and visitors to the premises and not used for any other purpose.

2. An access statement setting out how the application property shall be made as accessible as reasonably practicable for people with disabilities shall be submitted for the approval of the local planning authority within three months of the date of this planning permission. The approved scheme shall be implemented within three months of the date of written approval by the local planning authority and retained as such thereafter.

3. A Travel Plan, carried out in line with Transport for London transport assessments best practice guidance and national guidance for Travel Planning, shall be submitted for approval to the local planning authority within three months of the date of this planning permission. The approved Travel Plan shall be funded; implemented, reviewed and monitored in accordance  ...  view the full minutes text for item 33.

Agreed to refuse planning permission for the erection of 2 storey two-bedroom end of terrace house for the following reasons:

1. The proposed house is contrary to Unitary Development Plan Policy H15 and Local Development Framework Policy BP5 which both require the provision of 50 square metres of external amenity space for a new 2 bedroom house, only 32 square metres are provided and the lack of space would be to the detriment of the living standards of future occupiers; in addition the amenity space of the existing house would be reduced to an unacceptable size.

2.  The proposal is contrary to Policy 3A.5 of the London Plan which seeks to address the shortage of accessible housing in London by requiring that all new housing is built to ‘Lifetime Homes’ standards in addition to complying with Part M of the Building Regulations. The proposed house fails to provide a stair well wide enough to accommodate a stair-lift and the approach to the front and rear entrances is not level or gently sloping.

Agreed to grant planning permission for the use of ground floor surgery (Class D1) as a shop (Class A1), installation of new shopfront and erection of first floor rear extension, subject to the following conditions:

1. Time Limit

2. The shop unit shall not be occupied until details of the proposed shopfront, including materials of construction, have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority.

3. Q1 Details/Samples of Facing Materials.

4. K2 Accessibility of Shops

5. O1 Details of Dustbin Enclosures

Agreed to refuse planning permission for the demolition of garage and erection of part single/part two storey side extension in connection with conversion into 2 one bedroom flats, for the following reasons:

1. The development by virtue of its insufficient CEL (cooking, eating and living) space for the first floor flat, insufficient bedroom space for the ground floor flat and insufficient habitable floorspace for both flats would result in sub-standard units of accommodation detrimental to the living standards of and amenities enjoyed by any future occupiers of the flats, contrary to policies H10 and H16 and Strategic policy C of the Council’s Unitary Development Plan (1995) and policy BP6 of the Local Development Framework Borough Wide Development Policies Pre-submission Report (November 2008).

2. The development will result in the loss of a 3 bedroom family dwellinghouse and as such is contrary to Local Development Framework Policy BC4.

Agreed to grant planning permission for the erection of portal frame building for storage subject to the following conditions:

1.  Time Limit

2.  The development hereby permitted shall not be commenced until details of the parking layout for the site have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. At least one of the bays should be for the exclusive use of people with disabilities and comply with Part M of the Building Regulations; the approved parking areas shall be constructed and marked out prior to the occupation of the development, and thereafter retained permanently for the accommodation of vehicles of occupiers and visitors to the premises and not used for any other purpose.

3.  I11 Cycle Parking

4.  Q1 Details/Samples of Facing Materials

5.  U1A Land Contamination Survey

6.  The development permitted by this planning permission shall only be carried out in accordance with the approved Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) dated June 2009, reference number 1273 (version v1.0), compiled by Ambiental Technical Solutions Limited and the following mitigation measures detailed within the FRA:

·  Identification of a safe route into and out of the site to an appropriate safe haven as shown in the protection measures section on page 11 of the FRA.

The Principal Planning Officer outlined the proposal in planning application 08/01325/OUT/LBBD for the Board’s comments.

Board Members declined to follow the Officer’s recommendationsand asked for the following concerns to be passed on to the London Thames Gateway Development Corporation regarding the proposed development:

1. Density of development and public transport links

• The number of units proposed is inconsistent with the London Plan density matrix
• Poor public transport links to the borough
• Narrow access road to the town centre from the development site posing health and safety risks to pedestrians

2. Design, height and massing

• Serious concerns regarding the height of a number of the proposed blocks
• Development will unbalance the feel of the area

3. Family Accommodation

• The percentage of family accommodation is below the Council’s emerging Core Strategy Policy CC2 requirements

4. Affordable Housing

• The application falls foul of Policy CC1 of the Council’s emerging Core Strategy with regards to the percentage of affordable housing

5. Habitable floor area

• Nearly a fifth of the total number of units fall foul of UDP Policy H16 requirement. This will have implications for future occupiers’ quality of life

6. Sustainability

• The application fails to meet the requirement under the draft Local Development Framework to achieve a minimum Code for Sustainable Homes level 4 rating

7. Unresolved issues regarding daylight and noise 

Received and noted, details of one appeal lodged:

a)  Erection of two storey side extension and first floor rear extension - 82 Beccles Drive, Barking

Application (ref: 08/01399/FUL) refused under delegated powers 31 March 2009

And one appeal determined:

a)  Alterations to shopfront to provide new entrance to upper floors, remodelling of building and erection of second and third floor extension in connection with conversion of upper floors into 8 one-bedroom flats and staffroom for existing post office - 36-38 Station Parade, Barking. Appeal allowed 10 July 2009.

  Application (ref: 08/01402/FUL) refused under delegated powers 29 December 2008

Received and noted details of delegated decisions for the period 16 June – 1 July 2009.