Agenda, decisions and minutes

Councillor Tom Copley declared a personal interest as a Member of the Greater London Authority (GLA).  It was noted that GLA officials issued comments on the application.

The meeting noted an amendment by the Chair, Councillor John Paschoud, that interested parties would each, for the particular application, be allowed 20 minutes, not 5 minutes as stated in the Minutes, to address the Committee.

RESOLVED: That the Minutes of the meeting held on 3 September 2019 be confirmed as a correct record pending the amendment, and to send the amended version to the Chair for signing.

RESOLVED –

That it be agreed to approve Recommendations A and B under paragraphs 13 and 14 on page 75 of the agenda, subject to the following amendments:-

      i.        Add details to Condition 30 to include wind mitigation measures to all landscaped areas of the development and the adjacent courtyard of Plot 6 Deptford Timberyard to be submitted and approved by the LPA prior to above ground works.

    ii.        Add a condition to ensure that all lifts within the building provide access to all floors within the building in perpetuity.

   iii.        Add a condition requiring that full details of physical measures to be installed to limit access to the proposed outdoor playspace to occupiers of the proposed development [and their guests).

The Senior Planning Officer gave an illustrative presentation of the report, recommending to the Committee to agree the recommendations therein.  It was confirmed that an addendum report with corrections to the main report at paragraph 29 was published in a supplementary agenda.

The Panel noted the report and the supplementary to it, together a document of objections circulated to Members after the main agenda was published.  It was recognised that the application site comprised of Scott House, the host building, which existed as a non-designated heritage asset.

In response to questions raised, the Officer advised the Committee that although the level of affordable housing fell short of the 50% target in Core Strategy Policy 1, the Financial Viability Assessment (FVA) submitted by the applicant was endorsed by the Council’s independent assessor to be the maximum reasonable amount of affordable housing that can be delivered at this time.  Thus, affordable housing provision of 27.59% affordable housing with a 50/50 split between London Affordable Rent and London Living Rent the maximum that could possibly be delivered on the proposed site.  In addition, early and late review mechanisms would be in place to ensure that significant changes to the current financial viability outcome are captured and adjusted in a timely fashion.

Continuing with his response, the Officer clarified that the proposed affordable housing would not be sub-standard in delivery when compared to those developed for private sales.  It was stated that the affordable units would be ‘tenure blind’, with access via the same residential core.  Furthermore, all residents would have equal lift access from the same lobby and entrance area, and the café and ground floor level.  The Committee was advised that there would also communal outdoor spaces and cycle core at basement level to be used by all residents.

In light of further enquires, the Officer advised the Committee that the host building is afforded no statutory protection or Article 4 Direction.  The proposed commercial space would have strong street frontage onto Oxestalls Road and Grove Street.  It was confirmed that the retention of the frontage of the host building will help protect and enhance the Borough’s character and the street scene through appropriate high-quality design.  Thus, the retention of the most visible front elevations was considered an acceptable approach in an area of tall buildings and higher density.

Also clarified by the Officer was that doorstep play provided on-site for under 5s would be accessible to all residents and users of the café as an intuitive and integrated area of play within the formal landscape setting.  It was stated that public open spaces close to the application site had been identified as access play areas for older children.

Further clarification by the Officer was that wind speeds would be mitigated by the massing of the building and the presence of proposed landscaping, and trees at street level.

The meeting also noted representation by an architect and planning consultants on behalf of the applicant.  The representatives spoke in favour of the application,  ...  view the full minutes text for item 3.