Agenda and minutes

No apologies for absence were received.

Members will be asked to declare any pecuniary or non-pecuniary interests in respect of items on this agenda.

In respect of agenda item 7 (1&2), 100 and 100A Chalk Farm Road, Councillor Djemai declared for transparency that she had spoken to both the applicant and the person making the deputation objecting to the application in her capacity as ward member, however she was able to consider the application with an open mind.

Webcasting of the Meeting

The Chair to announce the following: “In addition to the rights by law that the public and press have to record and film public meetings, I would like to remind everyone present that this meeting will be broadcast live by the Council to the Internet and can be viewed on our website for twelve months after the meeting. After that time, webcasts are archived and can be made available on DVD upon request.

If you are seated in the Chamber it is likely that the Council’s cameras will capture your image and you are deemed to be consenting to being filmed and to the use of those images and sound recordings for webcasting and/or training purposes. If you are addressing the Committee your contribution will be recorded and broadcast unless you have already indicated that you do not wish this to happen.

If you wish to avoid appearing on the Council’s webcast you should move to one of the galleries.”

Any Other Announcements

Webcasting

The Chair announced that the meeting was being broadcast live to the internet and would be capable of repeated viewing and copies of the recording could be made available to those that requested them. Those seated in the Chamber were deemed to be consenting to being filmed.  Anyone wishing to avoid appearing on the webcast should move to one of the galleries.

Development Management on-line forum

Members were also informed that officers were facilitating a Development Management Forum online on Monday 23^rd September at 7pm. The developer would present amended development proposals for 100 Avenue Road which would be followed by a question-and-answer session. A briefing for Members would be provided at a later stage.

(i)       Written Communications

The Committee will be asked to receive written submissions in respect of items on the agenda, if any.

(ii)      Deputations

The Committee will be asked to receive requests for deputations in respect of items on the agenda, if any.

RESOLVED –

THAT the written submissions and deputation requests contained in the supplementary agenda be accepted.

There was no such business.

To consider the minutes of the meetings held on 11 July 2024 and 1 August 2024.

Consideration was given to the Minutes of the previous meetings.

RESOLVED –

THAT the Minutes of the meetings held on 11 July and 1 August 2024 be agreed and signed as accurate records of the meetings.

Report of the Executive Director Supporting Communities.

Consideration was given to the report of the Executive Director Supporting Communities.

Application no: 2024/0479/P      Officer: Kristina Smith

Proposal: Demolition of existing buildings and redevelopment of the site to provide two new buildings of between 6-12 storeys: one containing affordable homes (Class C3) and one (with three cylindrical volumes) containing purpose-built student accommodation with associated amenity and ancillary space (Sui Generis), a ground floor commercial space (Class E) together with public realm, access, plant installation, and other associated works.

RECOMMENDATION: Grant conditional planning permission subject to a s106 agreement following:

(i)           Referral to Mayor of London for his direction;

(ii)         Finalisation of detailed wording for conditions following consultation with the Mayor; and

Completion of Section 106 Agreement

Application no: 2024/0539/L       Officer: Kristina Smith

Listed Building consent: Removal of existing steel beams in party wall with adjoining Roundhouse and works of repair and making good to brickwork.

RECOMMENDATION: Grant listed building consent.

Consideration was also given to the information contained in the supplementary agenda as well as the deputation referred to under Item 4 above. 

Invited to comment on the residents’ objections about the overbearing height and scale of the proposals and how this had been addressed, the applicant remarked that all views from the consultation had been taken into account including community feedback, discussions with Council officers and Design Review Panels and a balanced view had been taken which involved maintaining the density of the site because of the benefits it delivered around affordable housing and public realm enhancements but moving the height to areas of the site where it was less harmful overall.

Responding to a follow up question about developing positive relationships with the community, the applicant commented that the theme emerging from the public consultation was how the area was being enhanced from a public realm and public safety point of view.

The Planning Officer also commenting on how the application proposals had responded to community feedback informed the Committee that the location and layout of the wheelchair accessible student homes had been changed and the units had been redistributed to improve the quality of the accessible accommodation in response to concerns raised during consultation.

Responding to further members questions, the Planning Officer provided the following information:

• The podium garden at the back of the building would be covered by a management plan and only be accessible for students and permanent residents which could only be accessed by fob entry to the building.
• There were benefits to the wider community from this project which included employment and training benefits. Officers had secured construction, end use apprenticeships and work placements with the applicant. The student housing would be managed to mitigate against negative impacts on the community.
• There were two commercial spaces being provided at ground floor level, one of which was intended for office use and smaller businesses while the other was for retail café use which would bring activity and compliment the town centre function.

Commenting further on the benefits of the application to the wider community during the construction stages, the applicant highlighted that they had academy initiatives within their business which trained local people through the construction stages helping them into construction jobs.

In terms of the Construction Management Plan the applicant already had a full team working on the coordination, with detailed discussions going on with Roundhouse, TfL, Thames Water and St George. Should planning permission be granted further discussion would continue with the wider community. The applicant intended to circulate newsletters, regular notification events and a monthly working group to provide a regular flow of information.

The Head of Development Management highlighted and reminded members that while it was helpful to understand more about the applicant’s background and how their business operated, weight could only be placed on what planning benefits were being secured in the section 106 and the value of those benefits justified against the Council’s planning policies.

Answering further questions,  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7(2)

Application no: 2023/5366/P      Officer: Edward Hodgson

Proposal: Partial demolition of Giles Slaughter Wing and full demolition of Fives

Building, maintenance hut and outdoor stepped seating; erection of part 1

and part 2 storey school building consisting of classrooms, medical and

wellbeing rooms, music recital room, music teaching rooms and stores,

drama studios, and ancillary cafeteria and offices (Class F1(a)) with

associated plant, sports area and court lighting posts and new retaining

walls and landscaping; new hard and soft landscaping and drainage; new

cycle parking and replacement car parking; and erection of 2 no. part 1 and

part 2 storey temporary accommodation buildings for the construction period

only.

RECOMMENDATION: Grant conditional planning permission subject to a Section 106 Legal Agreement

Consideration was also given to the information contained in the supplementary agenda relating to the written submission referred to under Item 4 above. 

A member commented that they were pleased to see that there was public access to some of the proposed new buildings and recital rooms querying whether there were any plans to allow children from the local state schools to use the new facilities or whether there were any schemes in place which allowed for these kinds of partnerships.

In response the School Headmaster commented that they were pleased to work with as many state school pupils and colleagues as possible, adding that a partnership scheme was already in existence which invited pupils into the school, explaining that the enhanced facility would build on that partnership work.

Responding to further member questions, officers provided the following information:

• Public access would be secured through the Public Access Plan which would be secured by Section 106 legal agreement and allow for further discussions on these topics.
• The building would have double glazed windows.

Invited to comment on the longevity of the development and whether there would be need for further changes at the site, the applicant’s architect informed the Committee that they were very committed to the site in the long term, the school had been on this site since 1906 and would shortly be celebrating their 200^th anniversary. It was fair to say that the school had a great commitment to the area of Hampstead and the local community with no intention of moving from there.

Commenting further they explained that the development that was proposed did not involve any increase in pupil numbers. It was more about the improving the quality of the accommodation and facilities that would serve the school and other members of the community, in terms of the development of the site it had gradually developed over time.

The Head of Development Management advised the Committee that an applicant could not be compelled to say that they were never going to expand a facility in the future, noting that there were lots of developments across the borough where sites got increasingly added to over time and they had to change or adapt. Adding that it had been disappointing that a building which had only recently been built on the site was to be demolished because the quality was not good enough for it to have the longevity that the Council wanted from schemes. However, the work officers had done with the applicant team on the scheme was to ensure that it was a development as good as it could be in sustainability terms and would have a long-life span. Members needed to be confident that it was a good quality scheme and had longevity.

The Planning Officer also highlighted that the classroom area had been designed to be flexible so it could be internally reworked in the future to meet a wide range of the school’s future requirements.

On being put to the vote,  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7(3)

Application no: 2024/0698/P      Officer: Josh Lawlor

Proposal: Demolition of existing single dwelling house (Class C3) and redevelopment to provide a 3-bedroom dwelling (Class C3) comprising basement, ground and first floors, with associated garden room, landscaping and air source heat pump.

RECOMMENDATION: Grant conditional planning permission subject to a Section 106 Legal Agreement

The Planning Officer introduced the application.

Upon being put to the vote, it was 7 votes that unanimously

RESOLVED –

THAT planning permission be granted subject to conditions and a section 106 legal agreement as set out in the agenda,

ACTION BY: Director of Economy, Regeneration & Investment   Borough Solicitor

There was none.