Agenda, decisions and minutes

Declarations of interests were received by:

·                     Councillor Paul Bell - as Cabinet Member of Housing;

·                     Councillor Kevin Bonavia - as a member of the Blackheath Society, the Blackheath Working Party, and the Local Democracy Working Group;

·                     Councillor Curran - as a supporter of the Lenox Project since its inception

·                     Councillor Paschoud - as a supporter of the Lenox project, and a member of the Sydenham Society.

RESOLVED that Minutes of meetings of the Strategic Planning Committee held on 30 January 2020 and 13 February 2020 be confirmed as correct records.

The Service Group Manager presented the report about temporary changes to the Scheme of Delegation, recommending to the Committee to agree the proposals therein, with a view to review them after a period of three months. 

Illustrative sketches of the current and proposed schemes to demonstrate to the Committee the importance of continuing with the determination of all valid planning applications were presented.  It was stated that the proposed changes would be made alongside revisions to the Council’s Statement of Community Involvement, which would be considered at a meeting of the Mayor and Cabinet on 10 June 2020.

The Committee noted the report, and the addendum to it.  It was recognised that due to the temporary postponement of planning committee meetings as a result of the lockdown created by the Covid-19 crisis, a backlog of planning applications requiring determination had arisen.

In discussing the recommendations, Members felt that the number of outstanding applications collated within the two months’ period since the lockdown were excessive, but acknowledged that the proposals would enable the Council to meet its duty in determining all valid planning applications submitted to it.  Members understood that failure do so within the timescale prescribed by the Government could result in applicants lodging appeals against the Council with the Planning Inspector on the grounds of non-determination.

Continuing with their discussion, Members sought clarifications about the intensions and potential implications of the proposed changes.  They expressed a view that the proposals should not distract from plans to consult and engage more widely with the community in light of a recommendation by the Local Democracy Group (LDG) to reform the Council’s planning decision-making.  Members stated that in view of the pending reform by the LDG, the recommendations in the report should only be approved on the basis that they would not be permanent, and that the review by the Committee after three months of implementation would be in accordance with the timeline specified by Officers.

In response to questions raised, the Director of Planning advised the Committee that the backlog of planning applications arose because it was not clear how the unprecedented circumstances would be managed immediately after the lockdown period.  However, the additional temporary decision-making delegation to officers outlined in the report would enable the Council to meet its duty in determining planning applications within the Government’s prescribed timescale.

The Director continued with her response, advising the Committee that the Planning department was committed to achieving recommendations on planning matters derived from the Local Democracy Review (LDR).  Thus, nuances in place would ensure that Members remain empowered to make panning decisions during the temporary change period.  As an indication, officers would continue to engage about rotas with chairs of planning committees in the event of a trigger of between 5 to 9 objections.  It was confirmed that referrals of objections to planning committees by ward councillors would remain.  Furthermore, the Planning department would continue to make referrals with significant impact and certain thresholds to the relevant committees as appropriate.  The  ...  view the full minutes text for item 3.

PLOT 22

RESOLVED

Unanimously

That it be agreed to:

a)         GRANT Reserved Matters approval (layout, scale, appearance, access and landscaping) in relation to development Plot 22 subject to conditions and informatives outlined in the report;

b)         DISCHARGE allother details and matters required to be approved under Condition 20(i) relation to Plot 22;

c)         DISCHARGE conditions 3(ii), 7, 8(i), 13, 14(i), 15, 21 (b) to (f) and 45(i) in relation to Plot 22 only;

d)         PARTIALLY DISCHARGE Condition 21(a), in relation to Plot 22 (to exclude approval of plant and equipment which have yet to be submitted)

e)         AUTHORISE the Director of Planning to finalise and issue the decision notice in relation to the application and to include such amendments as she may consider appropriate to ensure the acceptable implementation of the development.

And to include informatives summarised at the meeting as follows:

·  That planting choices be done in consultation with the local community

·  That the Cultural Steering Group meets more regularly in accordance with the s106

·  That CCTV installation be erected to provide timelapse record as the development progresses and to later be used for historic reference

PLOT 8

RESOLVED

That it be agreed to:

a)            GRANT Reserved Matters approval (layout, scale, appearance, access and landscaping) in relation to development Plot 08 subject to completion of the legal agreement proposed at recommendation f) and conditions and informatives outlined in the report:

b)            DISCHARGE allother details and matters required to be approved under Condition 20(i) relation to Plot 08;

c)            APPROVE DETAILS UNDER/DISCHARGE conditions 3(ii), 7, 8, 13, 14(i), 15, 19, 20, 21(b),(c),(d),(e) and (f), 33, 45(i), 47 and 50(i)

d)            PARTIALLY DISCHARGE Condition 21(a), in relation to Plot 08 (to exclude approval of details of bus stops and associated passenger facilities which have yet to be submitted)

e)            APPROVE the external lighting strategy under Condition 12(i) in relation to the whole site.

f)             AUTHORISE the Director of Planning to negotiate and complete a deed of variation to the Section 106 Agreement dated 15 March 2015, under Section 106 of the 1990 Act (and other appropriate powers) so as to secure that the 65 London Affordable Rent units within Plot 15 are delivered concurrently with Plot 08. 

g)            AUTHORISE the Director of Planning to finalise and issue the decision notice in relation to the application and to include such amendments as she may consider appropriate to ensure the acceptable implementation of the development.

And to include informatives summarised at the meeting as follows:

·  That the applicant consults with the local community in relation to playspace, including those for older children and young people.

·  That consideration be given to introduce public access to the podium level open space

·  That consideration be given to the erection of sheltered bus stops.

With an additional condition:

·  Requiring level access from street level to the open space area on the podium

PLOT 15

RESOLVED  ...  view the full decision text for item 4.

Prior to considering the proposals relating to the Convoy’s Wharf development in relation to Plots 22 and 8, the Committee received a background to the history of the proposed site by the Planning Team Leader.  It was noted that the proposals were related to an outlined planning application.

In response to questions raised, the Committee received clarification from the Officer that the Mayor of London (MoL) decision at the time the outlined application was considered allowed for a minimum of 15% affordable housing across the entire Convoy’s Wharf development site.  However, Council officers were in discussion with the applicant to identify ways to secure additional affordable housing.

The Committee was further advised by the Officer that the Steering Group would inform the process by which a cultural strategy would be submitted.  It would be the responsibility of the Council to agree the cultural strategy in consultation with the applicant.

Convoy’s Wharf - PLOT 22

The meeting noted that the Committee had received a background to the history of the proposed site by the Planning Team Leader.  It was confirmed that the previous Mayor of London (MoL) agreed the outline planning permission for Convoy’s Wharf, and allowed for a minimum of 15% affordable housing across the entire site.

The Planning Officer gave an illustrative presentation on an application for the approval of Reserved Matters and other details relating to Plot 22 within the Convoys Wharf Development.

The Committee noted the report and the addendums to it.  The scope of the proposed approved outline planning permission and the site description were also noted by the Committee.

In response to questions raised, the Officer advised the Committee that a condition was in relation to landscaping to the public realm, and would include full details of landscaping programme of the proposed site for approval by the Council, in consultation with partnering local authorities.  Thus, the expectation for public spaces to be opened at all times could be realised.

The Committee was further advised that Transport for London (TfL), as the operator of the proposed river station, would have the ultimate naming right for the proposed river stop to be erected on the development site.  However, the formal public consultation on the matter would most likely influence TfL’s decision-making.

The Officer also responded to a concern with an assurance to the Committee that the Council had experience of managing complex schemes.  It was confirmed that the Council would be utilising secured funding to monitor progress of the development when construction commenced on the proposed site.  Annual reports to be supplied by the applicant would form part of the monitoring activity.

The Committee also received clarification that the cost of operations would be borne by the applicant.  Furthermore, the CCTV strategy to be developed would be implemented as a safety measure, and not included in the monitoring process.

In light of a suggestion, the Director of Planning advised the Committee that the proposals were related to reserved matters.  Therefore, any  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.