Agenda, decisions and minutes

1.1  Apologies were received from Cllr Samatar.

2.1  The Chair declared a non-pecuniary interest in relation to agenda item 5; the interest was declared on the basis that the Chair knew one of the

applicant.

2.2  The Sub-Committee members declared an non-pecuniary interest; the Committee members had received an email from the applicant for agenda item five outlining the proposals being put forward.

2.3  All of the Sub-Committee members declared an non-pecuniary interest; the Committee members all knew fellow Hackney Councillor Polly Billington who was speaking in support of agenda item 5 2022/0971 and 2023/0973 53 Northchurch Road.

3.1 None.

The Planning Sub-Committee to consider and approve the minutes of their meeting held on 6 September 2023.

The minutes of the previous Planning Sub-Committee meeting, held on 6 September 2023, be approved as an accurate record of those meetings’ proceedings.

4.1 The Planning Sub-Committee considered and approved the minutes of the  Planning Sub Committee meetings held on  6 September 2023.

RESOLVED:

The minutes of the previous Planning Sub-Committee meetings, held on 6 September 2023 be approved as an accurate record of those meetings’ proceedings.

On the officer's recommendation, as set out in the application report, a majority of Sub-Committee members voted against the recommendation.

A motion to defer the application to seek a Retrofit Plan from the applicant was proposed by Councillor Young and seconded by Councillor Narcross.

This motion was carried by five votes For to four Against.

The Sub-Committee agreed to defer the application to allow for the consideration of the matter at a future Planning Sub-Committee meeting.

5.1  PROPOSAL: Installation of Photovoltaic panels on the rear and side roof slopes.

  POST SUBMISSION REVISIONS: Not applicable

5.2  The designated Planning Officer introduced the application.

No persons were registered to speak in objection to the application.

5.3  Stephen Grosz, representing the applicant, addressed the Sub-Committee speaking in support of the application.

5.4 Hackney Councillor Polly Billington addressed the Sub-Committee speaking in support of the application.

5.5   During the course of submissions and a discussion of the application, the following points were noted:

·  The Council’s Planning Service Conservation, Urban, Design and Sustainability (CUDS) Manager stated that the installation of the solar panels was reversible. The view of the Planning Service, in relation to the roof slates, was once the fabric was removed that was considered to be a loss and seen as irreversible. The Planning Service accepted that the applicant could do that but the there was little power the Planning Service had to allow that;

·  There was a brief explanation by the Planning Service of what was meant by substantial and less than substantial harm, as set out under the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF). Sub-Committee members noted that a very high bar was set for substantial harm. It was also noted that less than substantial harm could also refer to a significant impact on a heritage asset. In the case of the application before the Sub-Committee one significant impact was the visual impact on the architectural significance of the listed building and its immediate surroundings through the installation of the solar panels;

·  The Planning Service highlighted that there were no solar panels on any of the roofs of the surrounding grade two listed buildings on Northchurch Road as well as the buildings being in a conservation area. It was noted that the Planning Service had previously consented to three other similar types of installation but they were based on a side rear element with the level of harm being much reduced. If the application was approved it could potentially  set a harmful precedent to designated heritage assets within the borough;

·  The applicant commented that in the process of reversal all that would occur would be the removal of roof slates where fixings were required would be replaced by composite slates which would be drilled through and were in line with Historic England’s guidelines which states that the original roof slates must be maintained. The applicant stated that they were content to accept a condition similar to what had been accepted for a similar scheme in the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea. They also stated that once the solar panels were removed the roof would be restored to its original state;

·  The designated Planning Officer stated that the Planning Service were concerned that someone would be able to see the solar panels whilst walking down Northchurch Road. It was also highlighted that the solar panels would be more visible in the winter with less foliage around and also because they would be raised slightly off the roof;

·  The  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

Planning permission be granted subject to conditions and a Section 106 legal agreement.

6.1    PROPOSAL:

Change of use of ground floor community flat meeting rooms (Class F2) to a 1x 1-bedroom self-contained residential unit (Class C3) with the provision of cycle storage

  POST SUBMISSION REVISIONS:

None

6.2  The designated Planning Officer introduced the application as set out in the published report. This was a resubmission of a previous application submitted under the address ‘15 Keir Hardie Estate’. The current application has been submitted under the correct address of ‘14 Keir Hardie Estate’ to rectify this error.

No persons were registered to speak in objection or support of the application.

6.3  During the course of submissions and a discussion of the application, the following points were noted:

·  Some of the Sub-Committee expressed their support for this trend of changing the use of ground floor community flats into residential units. However, there was concerns expressed that the Council was opting for a piecemeal approach;

·  Responding to a question about whether the Planning Sub-Committee should examine more closely the policy of converting community flats to residential units and the impact on local residents access to community spaces; the Chair of the Sub-Committee recommended that issue would fall under the remit of the Council’s Living in Hackney Scrutiny Commission

Vote:

For:  Cllr Michael Desmond, Cllr Michael Levy, Cllr Clare Joseph,

Cllr Jon Narcross, Cllr Clare Potter, Cllr Steve Race (Chair), Cllr Ali Sadek, Cllr Jessica Webb (Vice Chair) and Cllr Sarah Young.

Against;  None.

Abstained:  None.

RESOLVED:

Planning permission be granted subject to conditions and Section 106 legal agreement.

Covering the following periods:

·  25.8.23 to 28.9.23

·  29.9.23 to 22.11.23

The delegated decisions document for the following periods to be noted:

·  25.8.23 to 28.9.23

·  29.9.23 to 22.11.23

RESOLVED:

The delegated decisions document for the following periods to be noted:

·  25.8.23 to 28.9.23

·  29.9.23 to 22.11.23

8.1  The Sub-Committee noted that their next meeting was on 11 January 2024.