Issue - meetings

Erection of a three storey plus basement house, together with installation of new timber gates and entrance to flat 8 Londesborough House.

14.1  The Planning Officer introduced the report, as set out in the agenda.

14.2  Andy Beckett, David Larkin and Keith Magnum spoke in objection to the scheme, their comments are summarised as follows:

§  David Larkin wished to clarify that his objection was not related to his duties on the Hackney Homes Board.

§  Felt that the information given in paragraph 6.4.3 of the report was inaccurate and that the list of objections was incomplete.

§  The ground floor gardens were intended for the use of residents and not for re-development.

§  44 of a total number of 82 residents had signed a petition objecting to the proposal.

§  The proposed development would dwarf no 8 Londesborough House and block its daylight.

§  Felt that it would set a precedent for selling off estate land.

§  Local Tenants Residents Association had not been consulted.

§  Loss of open space and views.

§  The proposed development would alter the symmetry of the existing site and was at least 1/3 larger than neighbouring properties.

§  Design was out of keeping with the surrounding area.

§  Land previously sold by the Council as freehold by mistake, which had generated this problem.

14.3  The Principal Solicitor clarified the situation regarding land use stating that it was possible to apply for planning permission on land that the applicant does not own, as long as the relevant notices had been served correctly.  She added that the land had not been defined in the UDP as public open space and so the application was not against policy.

14.4  The Planning Officer also confirmed that if permission was granted, the piece of land would need to be purchased before any work could take place and that the Council had previously indicated that they were not intending to sell this piece of land.

14.5Councillor Smith expressed strong concerns regarding the land use and loss of amenity space for other residents on the estate and proposed that the application be REFUSED on those grounds.  This was seconded by Councillor Hanson.

(Councillor Webb abstained from the vote).

RESOLVED that:-

The proposed development would result in land that currently forms part of the amenity space for Londesborough House being lost to private garden land.  It is therefore considered that the development would have a detrimental impact on the current level of amenity enjoyed by residents of Londesborough House.  As such, the proposal would be contrary to policies EQ1, HO3 of the Hackney Unitary Development Plan 1995 and Policy 4B1 of the London Plan 2008.