Report of the Executive Head of Planning and Transportation (ENCLOSURE).

                                                                                                                             (to follow)

The Committee considered a report on the above application for partial change of use extensions at ground floor level and external alterations to provide: a mixed use development comprising one one-bedroom, six two-bedroom and two three-bedroom self-contained flats at third floor level; retention and refurbishment of Use Class B1 office space at second and part third floor levels; provision of Use Class D1 (excluding places of worship, religious instruction and church halls) at first and ground floor levels; and provision of three additional Use Class A1 retail units, one A2 unit and one A3 unit at ground floor level, incorporating extensions; together with communal amenity space on the roof of the ground floor extensions for residential use; refuse and recycling facilities, and pedestrian and vehicular access ramps; reconfiguration of the car parking to provide 39 spaces; and provision of 61 bicycle spaces, landscaping and a new footpath.

Officers reported the receipt, subsequent to the preparation of their report, of additional comments from Environmental Health Officers and Transport for London, and an objection on behalf of St Anthony’s Hospital, all of which were covered by recommended conditions, amendments to certain of the recommended conditions and additional recommended conditions.

In response to questions officers explained: that the proposed parking spaces had been allocated to meet the Council’s standards; that the proposed college would be for students on low incomes and so they were unlikely to be car owners; that similar premises owned by the college elsewhere provided a minibus service from local public transport links and the applicant was likely to do the same in respect of the application site; that the operating hours of the college were specified in a recommended condition and consistent with the applicant’s other premises; and that they were not prepared to consider other uses within Use Class D1 as part of the current application.

10:42 pm – The Chair withdrew from the meeting and the chair was taken by the Vice-Chair.

Ms Janet Howard, an objector, and Councillor Brendan Hudson, a ward councillor, addressed the meeting under Standing Order 33.

The principal issues raised by Ms Howard were:-

• Residents living opposite the proposed flats would have hardly any privacy
• There would not be enough parking spaces
• There was already insufficient on-street parking
• The proposed development would create overlooking into the living rooms and bedrooms of adjoining residents

In response to questions Ms Howard confirmed that she had lived in Gander Green Lane since November 2009, and explained that residents of the proposed flats at third floor level would be able to look down and into her property.

10:48 pm – The Chair resumed the chair.

The principal issues raised by Councillor Hudson were:-

• The proposed development would bring an empty building into use and it would cease to be an eyesore
• The proposed flats would be on the top floor
• There would be very little amenity space for the residents, which should be adequate in relation to the scale of the development
• A financial contribution to off-site open space would not be sufficient mitigation
• The proposed flats would have large panoramic windows that would increase the likelihood of overlooking that did not arise with the previous office use
• The proposed flats should not prejudice the proper use of existing dwellings
• The proposed development should not have a detrimental effect on adjoining properties

In response to members’ questions the Chair ventured that the prospective students were likely to be aged 16 and above, but otherwise there was no information about the proposed college use.  Officers believed that most of the questions indicated by members were dealt with in their report.

A poll vote on a motion to defer consideration of the application and give the applicant a further opportunity to attend and respond to questions was held in accordance with Standing Order 33.4, when there voted:

To defer (8)                Councillors Mary Burstow, Adrian Davey, Bruce Glithero, Lester Holloway, John Leach, Janet Lowne, Tony Shields and Graham Whitham.

Resolved: That consideration of application No. A2010/63251/FUL be deferred until the Committee’s meeting on 17 November 2010 to enable the applicant to attend and provide further information.