Content

On the officer's recommendation, as set out in
the published application report, the six Sub-Committee members
present voted against the recommendation.
 
No votes for or to abstain were recorded for
the report’s recommendation.
 
A motion to refuse the proposal was proposed
by Councillor Jon Narcross (the Vice-Chair of the Sub-Committee)
and seconded by Councillor Ifraax Samatar.
 
All six Sub-Committee members present then
voted to refuse the application for the following reasons:
 
1.   By reason of
the substandard quality of accommodation proposed, the proposed
large House in Multiple Occupation would be detrimental to the
living conditions of future occupiers. The proposed development
would, therefore, conflict with Policies LP2 and LP22 of the
Hackney Local Plan 2033 (2020).
 
2.   By reason of
the inadequate provision of cycle parking storage which is safe,
secure and accessible for all, the proposed development would fail
to meet cycle parking standards as required by Policy LP42 of the
Hackney Local Plan 2033 (2020).
 
3.   In the absence
of a Unilateral Undertaking or a Section 106 Agreement to secure
appropriate rent levels in accordance with the Local Housing
Allowance, the development would fail to secure the proposed House
in Multiple Occupation at an affordable rent level, contrary to
Policy LP22 of the Hackney Local Plan 2033 (2020).
 
4.   In the absence
of a Unilateral Undertaking or a Section 106 Agreement securing
appropriate mitigation by restricting future occupiers of the
development from obtaining parking permits within the Controlled
Parking Zone, the proposed development would likely exacerbate
existing parking stress and congestion on the surrounding highway
network. The development would, therefore, be contrary to Policy
LP45 of the Hackney Local Plan 2033 (2020) and Policy T6 of the
London Plan (2021).