Agenda item

Proposal (A):  Removal of rear extension and erection of part one, part two storey rear extension (full planning permission).

Proposal (B):  Removal of rear extension and erection of part one, part two storey rear extension together with internal alterations comprising lowering of attic ceiling to create a shower room and internal alterations to create a bathroom at ground floor level.

 

7.1  The Chair wished to clarify whether any of the members knew Tim Sylvester (Assistant Director Finance), as he was the applicant.  The planning Members confirmed that they did not know Tim Sylvester and had not had previous dealings with him.

 

7.2  The Planning Officer introduced the report, as set out in the agenda.  The Chair asked the Urban Design & Conservation Manager to clarify the issue surrounding English Heritage and whether they should had been consulted, especially due to the fact that the applicant is a Council employee.

 

7.3  The Urban Design & Conservation Manager clarified the guidance for notifications of applications to English Heritage relating to Grade II listed buildings, relevant to the application:-

 

§  Applications for planning permission involving demolition (in whole or part) or material alteration of any listed building.

§  Applications which affect the character or appearance of a conservation area exceeding 1000sqm or higher than 20m.

 

7.4  The Urban Design & Conservation Manager stated that in his opinion the proposal did not fall within the guidance, as the works proposed did not involve the demolition of a principal external wall or a substantial part of the interior and therefore English Heritage did not need to be consulted.

 

7.5  David Smith spoke in objection to the scheme, his comments are summarised as follows:

 

§  Circulated copies of photos to Members, illustrating his argument.

§  Huge issue with the planning process, as information was not readily available.  Felt to be even more of an issue as the applicant was a Council employee.

§  Architectural drawings are inaccurate and misleading.

§  Proposed development would dramatically alter the historic character of the De Beauvoir area.

§  Properties 37-63 Northchurch Road are listed buildings and form a group of properties.  English Heritage states that this group of buildings must remain in character with each other.

§  Wished to know why English Heritage had not been consulted and having contacted English Heritage personally had been informed that they were unaware of this application.

§  Been informed that the CAAC had been requested to withdraw their objection to the proposal.

§  Appears that the application was fast-tracked, with last minute amendments and no visit from the Conservation Team.

 

7.6  The Chair expressed his disappointment at the poor quality of the drawings provided, considering the importance of the building and wished to clarify with the Planning Officer that they were satisfied the drawings accurately reflected the proposal and that a member of the Conservation Team had previously visited the site.

 

7.7  The Planning Officer stated that they were satisfied that the drawings were clear and accurately reflected the proposal and confirmed that a member of the Conservation Design Team had previously visited the site.

 

7.8  In response to the Chair, the Planning Applications Unit Manager also confirmed that she was satisfied from an enforcement point of view that the drawings were sufficiently clear and accurate to permit the Council to take enforcement action should the back extension be built above the front existing railings and be viewed from the front of the property.  She added that the conservation design team were very thorough and that they would have raised objections if they were not completely satisfied with the scheme.

 

7.9  Councillor Hanson wished to clarify the issue surrounding the Conservation Area Advisory Committee (CAAC), raised by the objector.  The objector stated that he had received a call from CAAC stating that they had been approached by the case officer to withdraw their objection.  The Planning Officer was not aware of this communication.

 

7.10  The Chair asked the Urban Design & Conservation Manager his view on the rear of the property and whether it would be unsymmetrical.  The Urban Design & Conservation Manager stated that a conservation officer had visited the site and although they had raised concerns about the rear of the property being unsymmetrical with neighbouring properties, they were satisfied that the extension could not be seen from the front steps of the property.  This had been achieved by dropping the level of the bathroom on the ground floor.  He added that the conservation team did not object to the scheme because, in this case, the extension was not harmful to the front view of the property. 

 

7.11  Members wished to clarify the height of the new bathroom at the rear of the property.  The Planning Officer referred to the drawings and informed Members that the level had been dropped in order to provide the bathroom with the required ceiling height and also to ensure that it was not visible from the front of the building.

 

7.12  In response to two questions from Councillor Desmond regarding materials and why the plans were not readily available, the Planning Officer stated that the materials were conditioned and that he was not aware of the issue of plans not being readily available and would follow this matter up with the case officer.

 

7.13  Members again stressed the importance of the extension not being able to seen from the front of the building.

 

Unanimously RESOLVED that:-

 

 

1.  SCB1 – Commencement within three years

  The development hereby permitted must be begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning with 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.

 

2.  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.

 

3.  SCM6 – Materials to be approved

  Samples of all 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 work on the external surfaces, boundary walls and ground surfaces commences on site, in accordance

 

  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.

 

 

1.  SCB1N – 3 years

The development hereby permitted must be begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date of this consent.

 

REASON: In order to comply with the provisions of Section 18(a) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 as amended.

 

2.  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.

 

3.  SCL8B – Demolition as part of Redevelopment Only

The demolition works hereby permitted shall not be carried out otherwise than as part of the completion of development for which planning permission ref 2008/1190 was granted on 05/11/2008 and such demolition and development shall be carried out without interruption and in complete accordance with the plans referred to in this consent and any subsequent approval of details.

 

REASON: As empowered by Section 74(3) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 and to maintain the character and the appearance of the De Beauvoir Conservation Area and the special architectural and historic interest of this listed building.

 

4.  SCL6 – Original Features

All existing ornamental features including chimney pieces, plasterwork, architraves, panelling, doors and staircase balustrade shall remain undisturbed in their existing position and shall be fully protected during the course of works on site, unless specifically authorised otherwise on the drawings hereby approved.

 

REASON: To ensure that those features which contribute to the special architectural and historic interest of the building are retained.

 

REASONS FOR APPROVAL

 

The following policies contained in the Hackney Unitary Development Plan (1995) and the London Plan 2008 are relevant to the approved development and were considered by this Council in reaching the decision to grant planning permission: EQ1 (Development Requirements); EQ12 (Protection of Conservation Areas); EQ13 (Demolition in a Conservation Areas); EQ14 (Alterations and Extensions of Buildings in Conservation Areas); EQ16 (Protection of Listed Buildings) and EQ17 (Alteration to Listed Buildings) and 4B.1 – ‘Design Principles for a Compact City’.

 

INFORMATIVES

 

The following Informative should be added:

 

SI.1  Building Control

SI.3  Sanitary, Ventilation and Drainage Arrangements

SI.7  Hours of Building Works