Issue - meetings

The Committee received an application for S73 Variation of condition 2 (Approved plans) of planning permission 19/0046/FUL (Alterations and repairs to building including reinstatement of frontages and side walls, bricking up of some openings, replacement windows and fire escape. Creation of second floor element and enclosed roof terraces to first and second floor. Part change of use of the existing building to recreational uses).

The Committee received a representation in objection to the application from the Objectors’ Agent (written statements read by Committee Manager):

      i.          Her clients were the owners of No 1-8 Riverside Court and 24 & 24a Chesterton Road.  Throughout the planning application stages objectors had expressed concern regarding the detrimental impact the development would have on their residential amenity if the planning conditions were not complied with. 

     ii.          Was pleased to see that condition 20 remained During a recent site visit by one of the clients they could see the windows in the eastern flank wall were not currently obscure glazed.  Agent’s interpretation of the current wording of condition 20 (and the new one proposed for the s73 permission) was that the glazing itself would need to be obscured and that plain glass with an obscured plastic coating would not be sufficient. Asked the Committee to confirm they were expecting obscured glass and not just plastic coating, any plain glass would need to be removed and replaced prior to “first occupation”. It was essential that this was brought to the applicant’s attention and rectified prior to occupation.

   iii.          Looking at condition 9 of the proposed permission this required the submission of a noise insulation/mitigation scheme prior to commencement on site – on perusing the planning history for the site the Objector’s Agent couldn’t see that an application to discharge this condition had been submitted. It was essential that the Council acted swiftly to ensure that all noise mitigation planning conditions are enforced, and any provisions in approved schemes are put into place before this use commences. 

Councillor Baigent proposed an amendment to the Officer’s recommendation to include an informative the fire escape was safe to use.

This amendment was carried unanimously.

The Committee:

Unanimously resolved to grant the application for S73 permission in accordance with the Officer recommendation, for the reasons set out in the Officer’s report, and subject to the conditions recommended by the Officer including the informative relating to the fire escape.