Agenda, decisions and minutes

1.1  RESOLVED – that Councillor Vincent Stops be appointed as the Chair of the Planning Sub-Committee.

2.1  RESOLVED – that Councillor Michael Desmond be appointed as the Vice-Chair of the Planning Sub-Committee.

3.1  Apologies were received from Councillors Sharer, Smith, Stauber and Tesler.

3.2  An apology for lateness was received from Councillor Hanson.

4.1  The order of business was changed as follows:

§  Item 11 was withdrawn from the agenda, at the request of the Planning Officer.

§  Item 13 was withdrawn from the agenda, at the request of the Planning Officer.

§  Item 14 was taken after Item 8.

4.1  The order of business was changed as follows:

§  Item 11 was withdrawn from the agenda, at the request of the Planning Officer.

§  Item 13 was withdrawn from the agenda, at the request of the Planning Officer.

§  Item 14 was taken after Item 8.

5.1  Councillor Desmond declared a prejudicial interest in Item 9 – 30 Benthal Road, as he had previously been involved with the application.

Modifications to planning permission reference 2007/1841 to provide a mixed use scheme comprising 490 residential units (Class C3), 730 sqm for a community hall and related facilities Class D1), 1240 sq m retail, restaurant, business and other uses (Class A1, A2, A3, A4, B1, D1, D2), round and basement car parking (169 spaces). The development comprises seven blocks of four to twenty seven storeys in height, a new access road running between Woodberry Grove and Towncourt Path, a re-aligned junction at Woodberry Grove/Woodberry Down, a new linear public open space and new Doorstep Playable Space.

(Councillor Hanson arrived during the discussion of the item and therefore did not take part in the vote).

7.1  The Planning Officer introduced the report, as set out within the agenda.  He explained that there had been some slight alterations and that the height of the tower had now been increased by 1.8m.

7.2  Reference was made to the addendum, which listed the revised drawings.

7.3  Councillor Middleton spoke in objection to the scheme, on behalf of residents, her comments are summarised as follows:-

§  Felt that the report was unclear.

§  The height of the tower had now been increased from 21 to 25 storeys and requested clarification.

§  Clarification sought on the size of the intermediate units and whether leaseholders would be given the same size accommodation.

§  Happy that the community centre would now be located on the ground floor.

§  There was a need for proper air conditioning in the community centre.

§  Wished to clarify whether the libraries and education money would be ring fenced for Woodberry Down.

§  Requested that like for like businesses be replaced, so that the existing businesses do not lose their livelihoods.

7.3  Peter Naughton spoke in support of the scheme, his comments are summarised as follows:-

§  He expressed appreciation, on behalf of residents, for the work undertaken by Berkeley Homes in improving the layout of the majority of the units.

§  The issue surrounding new parking bays needed to be resolved.

§  The community facility in Block A, had now been moved to Block G.  

§  Supported the request that like for like businesses be replaced, so that the existing businesses do not lose their livelihoods.

7.4  Shaun Tickle (Agent) spoke in support of the scheme, his comments are summarised as follows:-

§  The changes being made were as a result of the current economic climate, in order to provide a range of tenures to meet demand.

§  The community facility was now being located in Block G on the ground floor.

§  Berkeley Homes have required 12 Towncourt Path and its demolition which will allow for the opportunity to extend Block G further westwards, increasing the number of overall units that the scheme can provide.

7.5  The Chair wished to clarify why the increased height of the tower was deemed acceptable and the Sustainability & Design Manager explained that in terms of overall height this was not an issue, in principle.  He added  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

Mixed use development to provide 207 residential units (70 x 1 bed, 69 x 2 bed, 45 x 3 bed and 23 x 4 bed including 65 affordable units) 5130sqm B1 floor space, 704sqm D1 (health centre)/B1 floor space, 271sqm A1 (retail) floor space, 86sqm A3 (restaurant) floor space, 336sqm B8 floor space plus associated landscaping, refuse and cycle storage together with 53 car parking spaces.  This application is accompanied by associated Conservation Area Consent and Listed Building Consent applications.

POST REVISION SUMMARY:

The following details have been provided following the consultation period and have sought to respond to points raised by LBH officers and the GLA:

Play Space and Sunlight Plan – PL312 April 2009

Wheelchair Adaptable units – PL305

Typical Lifetime Home unit – PL306, 307, 308, 309, 310,

PBA – Technical notes (Bus Stop Audit Notes) - 02/04/2009, Bus stop map, Bus stop audit

Hoare Lea – Response to GLA’s comments, April 2009

Amendments to Delva Patman Associates Daylight and Sunlight Study (KingsWharf )20^th April 2009.

(Councillor Desmond arrived during the discussion of this item and so did not take part in the vote).  

8.1  The Planning Officer introduced the report, as set out in the agenda.  A model was displayed at the meeting for Members’ information.

8.2  The Planning Officer referred to the addendum and informed the Sub-Committee that since the report was written, a further ten objection letters had been received.  It was explained that the grounds of objection predominately reiterate comments previously made and as set out in the report.  One further point referred to the lack of cross section and elevation drawings to the East Basin side of the application, which were submitted by the applicant.

8.3  Tiago Correia spoke in objection to the scheme, his comments are summarised as follows:-

§  Representing Kingsland Wharf residents.

§  Loss of daylight/sunlight.  Units had been incorrectly clarified, as a result 5 units failed to comply.

§  Phasing and completion – the B1 office space should be completed before the rest of the development.

§  Feel that artists are being pushed out of the borough.

§  Barbican Arts Group Trust charity had been operating in the area for 35 years, providing affordable space for artists.  They were not included within the development.

8.4  Michael Doyle (Agent) spoke in support of the scheme, his comments are summarised as follows:-

§  They are an RSL that operate on a not-for-profit basis.  Therefore all profits made on the development would be recycled.

§  The daylight/sunlight report showed that 100% of the units were compliant with guidelines.

§  Read out a letter from the Barbican Arts Group Trust stating that they were happy with the proposed scheme and plans. 

§  They were happy to come to some agreement regarding the relocation of the Barbican Arts Group Trust.

8.5  Discussion took place surrounding the daylight/sunlight issue and the Planning Officer explained that there were 3 different measures used.  The tests concluded that under the average  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

Retention of 1 x 4 bedrooms flat at basement and ground floor level and 2 x 2 bedroom flats at first and second floor levels.

Removal of unauthorised roof extension and replacement with twin hipped roof with front and rear roof lights.

Removal of studios unit at roof level and use of roof space in conjunction with second floor flat

Removal of unauthorised flat roof above rear addition and replacement with pitched roof

Retention (with alterations) of rear extension at second floor level.

POST SUBMISSION REVISIONS: Correction of existing plans to show existing window at second floor level, omission of proposed rear dormer window and replacement with 2 x roof light windows, reduction in height of chimney stack as original and as proposed (amendments received 27/05/2009).

(Councillor Desmond declared a prejudicial interest as he had previously been involved with the application and left the chamber during discussion).

9.1  The Planning Officer introduced the report, as set out in the agenda.  Reference was made to the addendum which included a site plan and existing, proposed and ‘as built’ plans, sections and elevations.

9.2  Nick Edwards (Benthal Road Action Group) spoke in objection to the scheme, his comments are summarised as follows:-

§  Numerous objections had been submitted.

§  Feel that the development was purely for financial gain.

§  A petition had also been submitted in May.

§  There were inaccuracies in the plan, which needed to be resolved.

§  An unnecessary and unsightly box had been erected to the rear of the property, housing the stairwell.

§  Issue of overlooking.

§  No functional necessity to the stairwell box.

§  Ruins the character of the surrounding area.

9.3  Michael Sierens (Architect) and Patrick Donnelly (Agent) spoke in support of the scheme, their comments are summarised as follows:-

§  The scheme complies with the UDP policies and London Plan.

§  The stairwell is housed by a small box to the rear of the property and feel that this is the only sensible option.

§  Happy to discuss the materials to be used.

9.4  The Committee requested that the materials be conditioned and insisted that brick be used.  This was AGREED.

9.5  Discussion took place regarding the boxed stairwell at the rear of the property, as Members raised concern that it adversely affected the character of the building and the surrounding properties.

9.6  In response to a question regarding the viability of an internal staircase, the Planning Officer stated that an internal staircase was preferred, however Members had to consider the application submitted.  The agent added that it would not be a viable option to provide an internal staircase.

9.7  Councillor Hanson proposed that the application be REFUSED, on the grounds that insufficient effort had been made to retain the existing character of the house and that it would adversely impact upon the surrounding area.  This was seconded by Councillor Webb.

RESOLVED that:-

§  Insufficient effort made to keep the character of the existing property.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9.

Redevelopment of site to comprise a part-three-, part-five-storey building containing 255 units of student accommodation and 213 square metres of retail space (use class A1) on ground floor, together with associated landscaping, cycle parking and outdoor amenity space.

POST-SUBMISSION REVISIONS: Enlargement of bin store and reconfiguration of cycle storage.

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

10.2  The Planning Officer confirmed that there were minor revisions to the internal courtyard elevation.

10.3  There being no questions from Members, the Chair moved to the vote.

Unanimously RESOLVED that:-

1.  SCB0 – Development in accordance with plans

The development hereby permitted shall only be carried out and completed strictly in accordance with the submitted plans hereby approved and any subsequent approval of details.

REASON: To ensure that the development hereby permitted is carried out in full accordance with the plans hereby approved.

2.  SCB1 – Commencement within three years

The development hereby permitted must be begun not later than three years after the date of this permission.

REASON: In order to comply with the provisions of Section 91(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended.

3.  SCM6 – Materials to be approved

Details, including samples, of all materials to be used on the external surfaces of the building, boundary walls, gates and ground surfaces shall be submitted to and approved by the local planning authority, in writing, before work on the external surfaces, boundary walls, gates and ground surfaces commences on site. The development shall not be carried out otherwise than in accordance with the details thus approved.

REASON: To ensure that the external appearance of the building is satisfactory and does not detract from the character and visual amenity of the area.

4.  SCM9 – No extraneous pipework

No soil stacks, soil vent pipes, flues, ductwork or any other pipework shall be fixed to the (street) elevations of the building other than as shown on the drawings hereby approved.

REASON: To ensure that the external appearance of the building is satisfactory and does not detract from the character and visual amenity of the area.

5.  SCI3 – No roof plant

No plant (including all external enclosures, machinery and other installations; excluding solar water-heating and/or photovoltaic cells) shall be placed upon or attached to the roof or other external surfaces of the building, other than as shown on the drawings hereby approved, unless planning permission for such is sought and granted separately.

REASON: To ensure that the external appearance of the building is satisfactory and does not detract from the character and visual amenity of the area.

6.  SCH10 – Secure bicycle parking

Lockable space shall be made available within the site for the secure parking of 147 bicycles, in accordance with the plans hereby approved, before the first occupation of the development.

REASON: To ensure that a reasonable provision is made within the site for the parking of bicycles in the interest of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 10.

Conversion of a single dwelling house to create 4 self-contained flats (comprising 1 x 4 bed flat and 3 x 2 bed flats) together with demolition of part of the rear single storey extension and excavation to create a rear lightwell and rebuilding of the rear single storey extension.

POST SUBMISSION REVISIONS: Existing & proposed front elevations have been amended.

RESOLVED that:-

Retention of works comprising a four-storey (plus basement) building with 1536 square metres of commercial floorspace (use class B1) at basement, ground- and first-floor levels and eleven residential units above (comprising five one-bedroom, two two-bedroom, three three-bedroom and one four-bedroom flats), with five parking spaces.

POST-SUBMISSION REVISIONS: Provision of additional bicycle-store security.

12.1  The Planning Officer introduced the report, as detailed within the agenda.  Reference was made to the addendum which highlighted that an additional letter of objection had been received, details of which were set out within the addendum.

12.2  The Planning Officer referred to the history of the development and the various applications submitted and made reference to paragraph 8.2.5 of the report which stated that residents had no entitlement (unless the holder of a disabled person’s badge) to a resident’s parking permit.  This caused the applicant some concern as the previous planning application granted had included the provision of six car parking spaces.  

12.3  The Chair explained that Members had to consider the application as a new application, as if it had not already been built.

  (Councillor Desmond abstained from the vote).

RESOLVED that:-

1.  SCH4 – Forward vehicle ingress/egress only

All vehicles shall enter and leave the site only in a forward direction.

REASON: In the interests of road safety generally and avoidance of obstruction of the highway.

2.  SCH8 – Parking for persons with disabilities

Before the use hereby permitted first commences, at least one car-parking space shall be marked and retained permanently for use by the vehicles of a person with disabilities at locations close to the entrance to the buildings.

REASON: In order to ensure that a reasonable minimum of parking spaces are located conveniently for the use persons with disabilities.

3.  SCH9 – Marking of parking/service areas

Before the use hereby permitted first commences, appropriate markings shall be used to delineate all car parking spaces and service areas within the site/development as shown on the permitted plans, such marking to be maintained permanently.

REASON: In the interests of orderly and satisfactory parking provisions being made on the site to ensure that the proposed development does not prejudice the free flow of traffic or public safety along the adjoining highway.

4.  SCH10 – Secure bicycle parking

Lockable space shall be made available within the site for the secure parking of fifteen bicycles in accordance with the plans hereby approved, before the first occupation of the development.

REASON: To ensure that a reasonable provision is made within the site for the parking of bicycles in the interest of relieving congestion in surrounding streets and improving highway conditions in general.

5.  SCI3 – No roof plant

No plant (including all external enclosures, machinery and other installations; excluding solar water-heating and/or photovoltaic cells) shall be placed upon or attached to the roof or other external surfaces of the building, other than as shown on the drawings hereby approved, unless planning permission for such is sought and granted  ...  view the full minutes text for item 12.

Variation of Condition 3 of planning permission ref: II/23152 dated 14 October 1994 to extend hours of opening of existing drive-thru restaurant between 6:00am to midnight Sunday to Wednesday and 06:00am to 02:00am Thursday and Saturday.

RESOLVED that:-

Change of use of B2/B8 (general industry/storage or distribution) arches at 196-198 Morning Lane to A1 and physical refurbishment of existing arches at 189-222 Morning Lane, including installation of new elevations (brickwork and glazing), extensions (to north of arches 216-219 and to the south of 202-210), internal improvements and resurfaced access and parking arrangements to the Morning Lane frontage between arches 193-198.

14.1  The Planning Officer introduced the report, as detailed within the agenda.  Reference was made to the addendum and that 20 additional letters of objection had been received from occupiers of the affected arch units.  The main points of objection were detailed within the addendum.

14.2  Councillor Mulready spoke in objection to the scheme, on behalf of residents, her comments are summarised as follows:-

§  Lack of knowledge and consultation, especially as the vast majority of occupiers are Turkish speaking.

§  Network Rail unwilling to engage with the occupiers and the Council.

14.3  Tundai Mautsi spoke in objection to the scheme, his comments are summarised as follows:-

§  Occupiers were not given 21 days notice of the application.  They received no plans until 20 May and therefore were given insufficient time to respond.

§  Concerned about where the existing businesses would be located.

§  23 trees will be taken down as a result of the development.

§  Lack of information given on the website.

14.4  In response to the concern raised about the loss of trees, both the Planning Officer and Network Rail were unaware of any trees being lost.

14.5  Discussion took place surrounding the issue of relocation of existing businesses and Steve Taylor (Network Rail) explained that they would try and relocate businesses, where possible, and that this was an ongoing process.   He added that they had approximately 30-40% of arches vacant in their portfolio.

14.6  Members requested that the existing businesses be relocated before work on the new development commenced.  It was therefore requested that Network Rail submit a management plan for decanting existing tenants and re-locating them, for approval before work commenced.  This was AGREED.

14.7  Councillor Webb raised concern about the scheme and that there appeared to be a lack of consideration for the existing hard working businesses, although she recognised the need to regenerate the area.

(Councillor Webb voted against the recommendation).

RESOLVED that:-

1.  SCB0 – Development in accordance with plans

  The development hereby permitted shall only be carried out and completed strictly in accordance with the submitted plans hereby approved and any subsequent approval of details.

  REASON: To ensure that the development hereby permitted is carried out in full accordance with the plans hereby approved.

2.  SCB1 - Commencement within three years

  The development hereby permitted must be begun not later than three years after the date of this permission.

  REASON: In order to comply with the provisions of Section 91(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended.

3.  SMC6 – Materials to be approved (entire  ...  view the full decision text for item 14.

Change of use of B2/B8 (general industry/storage or distribution) arches at 196-198 Morning Lane to A1 and physical refurbishment of existing arches at 189-222 Morning Lane, including installation of new elevations (brickwork and glazing), extensions (to north of arches 216-219 and to the south of 202-210), internal improvements and resurfaced access and parking arrangements to the Morning Lane frontage between arches 193-198.

14.1  The Planning Officer introduced the report, as detailed within the agenda.  Reference was made to the addendum and that 20 additional letters of objection had been received from occupiers of the affected arch units.  The main points of objection were detailed within the addendum.

14.2  Councillor Mulready spoke in objection to the scheme, on behalf of residents, her comments are summarised as follows:-

§  Lack of knowledge and consultation, especially as the vast majority of occupiers are Turkish speaking.

§  Network Rail unwilling to engage with the occupiers and the Council.

14.3  Tundai Mautsi spoke in objection to the scheme, his comments are summarised as follows:-

§  Occupiers were not given 21 days notice of the application.  They received no plans until 20 May and therefore were given insufficient time to respond.

§  Concerned about where the existing businesses would be located.

§  23 trees will be taken down as a result of the development.

§  Lack of information given on the website.

14.4  In response to the concern raised about the loss of trees, both the Planning Officer and Network Rail were unaware of any trees being lost.

14.5  Discussion took place surrounding the issue of relocation of existing businesses and Steve Taylor (Network Rail) explained that they would try and relocate businesses, where possible, and that this was an ongoing process.   He added that they had approximately 30-40% of arches vacant in their portfolio.

14.6  Members requested that the existing businesses be relocated before work on the new development commenced.  It was therefore requested that Network Rail submit a management plan for decanting existing tenants and re-locating them, for approval before work commenced.  This was AGREED.

14.7  Councillor Webb raised concern about the scheme and that there appeared to be a lack of consideration for the existing hard working businesses, although she recognised the need to regenerate the area.

(Councillor Webb voted against the recommendation).

RESOLVED that:-

1.  SCB0 – Development in accordance with plans

  The development hereby permitted shall only be carried out and completed strictly in accordance with the submitted plans hereby approved and any subsequent approval of details.

  REASON: To ensure that the development hereby permitted is carried out in full accordance with the plans hereby approved.

2.  SCB1 - Commencement within three years

  The development hereby permitted must be begun not later than three years after the date of this permission.

  REASON: In order to comply with the provisions of Section 91(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended.

3.  SMC6 – Materials to be approved (entire  ...  view the full minutes text for item 14.

S73 Application for the variation of condition 2 (development in accordance with approved plans) of planning permission 2008/3142 to permit development in accordance with revised plans, comprising changes to residential mix, internal layouts and minor elevation changes.

NB: Members are requested to note that the matters under consideration are modifications to a previously approved planning application ref: 2008/3142.

Application 2008/3142 permitted the: - “Clearance of the site and the construction of a part 5, part 14 storey building for a mixed use development to provide 83 square metres of A1, B1 and/or D1 use and 97 affordable residential units with associated car parking, refuse and landscaping.”

The modifications consist of the following:-

·  Although the overall number of units remains the same, the mix of units size as approved is altered by this proposal as follows:

- Approved - Social Rented - 11 x 1-bed, 5 x 2-bed, 23 x 3-bed, and 14 x 4-bed (53 in total). Intermediate – 23 x 1-bed, 11 x 2-bed and 10 x 3-bed (44 in total); and,

- Proposed – Social Rented - 16 x 1-bed, 1 x 2-bed, 23 x 3-bed, and 14 x 4-bed (54 in total). Intermediate – 30 x 1-bed, 2 x 2-bed and 11 x 3-bed (43 in total).

·  Additional 8 person lift added to the tower between ground and thirteenth floor.

·  Alterations to the arrangement of wheelchair accessible units throughout the development (overall this number of wheelchair accessible units from 11 to 12). In particular:

i)  5 no 3B/5P wheelchair accessible units to the lower building converted to 5 no 3B/6P non- wheelchair accessible units

ii)  4 no. 4B/7P wheelchair accessible units in lower building converted to 4 no 4B/8P non- wheelchair accessible units;

iii)  1 no 3B/5P unit to the ground floor converted to 1 no 3B/5P wheelchair accessible unit; and,

iv)  10 no 2B/4P units to the tower converted to 10 no 1B/2P wheelchair accessible units.

·  Alterations to the size of balconies across the development. In particular:

i)  39 projecting balconies increase in depth from 1200mm to 1500mm;

ii)  18 recessed balconies increase in depth from 1200mm to 1500mm.

·  6 x 4B/6P duplex units to the lower floors to the north of the development re-configured to be south facing living rooms (at entry point).

·  Design of entrance to the communal cores altered.

·  Elevational alterations including re-position of windows/balconies to reflect the other alterations detailed above.

15.1  The Planning Officer introduced the report, as detailed within the agenda.

15.2  Ruth Prudden spoke in objection to the scheme, her comments are summarised as follows:-

§  She was not invited to attend the previous meeting where the application was initially presented, due to a clerical error.

§  Her property would be severely affected by the development in terms of loss of daylight/sunlight and views across the city.

§  The development would also adversely affect the financial value of her property.

15.3  Tim Gaskell (Agent) explained why the application had come back to Committee, details of which were set  ...  view the full minutes text for item 15.

Demolition of existing buildings and redevelopment of the site to provide a part two/ part five storey building comprising of 1078 sqm of B1 floor space and seven residential units with associated landscaping.

POST SUBMISSION REVISION: Changes to the detailed design of the front elevation.

16.1  The Planning Officer introduced the report, as set out in the agenda and referred to the changes to the detailed design of the front elevation.

16.2  Members requested that the street lamps be located on the building and the applicant stated that he had no objection to the proposal in principle.  This was AGREED.

16.3  The Planning Officer confirmed that bicycle storage would be provided for 14 bicycles.

16.4  Members felt that there had been a significant improvement in the design of the development and reference was made to the section 106 agreement which was previously unsigned.  Members wished to have assurances that this would not happen again and the Planning Officer stated that it would be signed off the following week.

Unanimously RESOLVED that:-

1.  SCB0 – Development in accordance with plans

The development hereby permitted shall only be carried out and completed strictly in accordance with the submitted plans hereby approved and any subsequent approval of details, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority.

REASON: To ensure that the development hereby permitted is carried out in full accordance with the plans hereby approved.

2.  SCB1 - Commencement within three years

The development hereby permitted must be begun not later than three years after the date of this permission.

REASON: In order to comply with the provisions of Section 91(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended.

3.  SCM6 – Materials to be approved

No development shall take place until full details, with samples, of the materials to be used in the construction of external surfaces of the development hereby permitted have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

REASON: To ensure that the external appearance of the building is satisfactory and does not detract from the character and visual amenity of the area.

4.  SCM7 – Full details

Detailed drawings / full particulars of the proposed development showing the matters set out below must be submitted to and approved by the local planning authority, in writing, before any work is commenced. The development shall not be carried out otherwise than in accordance with the details thus approved.

a) Doors and windows

b) Controlled entry system

c) Balconies and screening

d) Security lighting

REASON: To ensure that the external appearance of the building is satisfactory and does not detract from the character and visual amenity of the area.

5.  SCM9 - No extraneous pipework

No soil stacks, soil vent pipes, flues, ductwork or any other pipework shall be fixed to the elevations of the building other than as shown on  ...  view the full minutes text for item 16.

Demolition of existing buildings and construction of a three to six storey building comprising 41 affordable flats (8 x 1-bed, 19 x 2-bed, 7 x 3-bed, 7 x 4-bed) and the provision of a new 265m2 community hall (Class D1) on ground floor, with car parking, refuse provision and landscaping.

17.1  The Planning Officer introduced the report, as set out in the agenda.  It was explained that this had come back to Committee as Members had requested that the corridors be a minimum of 1.45m in width. 

17.2  In response, the architect stated that it would make the development unviable if the corridors were a minimum of 1.45m in width.  A condition had been added to the recommendation regarding minimum corridor widths.

Unanimously RESOLVED that:-

1.  Development in accordance with plans

The development hereby permitted shall only be carried out and completed strictly in accordance with the submitted plans hereby approved and any subsequent approval of details.

REASON: To ensure that the development hereby permitted is carried out in full accordance with the plans hereby approved.

2.  Commencement within three years

The development hereby permitted must be begun not later than three years after the date of this permission.

REASON: In order to comply with the provisions of Section 91(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended.

3.  Materials to be approved (entire site)

Details, including samples, of materials to be used on the external surfaces of the building, boundary walls and ground surfaces shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority, in writing, before any work commences on site. The development shall not be carried out otherwise than in accordance with the details thus approved.

REASON: To ensure that the external appearance of the building is satisfactory and does not detract from the character and visual amenity of the area.

4.  Details to be Approved

Notwithstanding the materials shown on the plans hereby approved, detailed drawings/full particulars of the proposed development showing the matters set out below must be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority, in writing, before any work is commenced. The development shall not be carried out otherwise than in accordance with the details thus approved:

·  The design details and materials of the composition of coloured glass panels used on community hall.

·  The design details and materials of projecting box feature on Furrow Lane.

·  The design details and materials of signage on Furrow lane façade and Community Hall.

·  Details of all types of windows, doors and gates, balconies (including soffits and balustrades).

·  Details of typical wall sections.

REASON: To ensure that the external appearance of the building is satisfactory and does not detract from the character and visual amenity of the area.

5.  No extraneous pipework

No soil stacks, soil vent pipes, flues, ductwork or any other pipework shall be fixed to the (street) elevations of the building other than as shown on the drawings hereby approved.

REASON:  ...  view the full minutes text for item 17.

The report was NOTED.

The report was NOTED.

The report was NOTED.

The report was NOTED.