Agenda item

RESOLVED                                                                              

That it be noted that the Committee agreed to:

GRANT planning permission for the demolition of existing social club at 240-242 Brockley Road SE4 and the construction of a part four/part five storey building including:

•           basement comprising new social club with 9 residential units above (7 x 2 bedroom & 2 x 3 bedroom), together with the provision of bicycle and refuse stores, landscaping and amenity space, terraces and a pergola in the rear garden.

Subject to conditions and informatives outlined in the report and,

A requirement that officers should:

•           Add a condition requiring the implementation of gas boilers into the scheme, be a last resort measure after other options are considered.  

The Planning Officer, gave an illustrative presentation recommending the grant of planning permission for the demolition of existing social club at 240-242 Brockley Road SE4 and the construction of a part four/part five storey building including basement comprising new social club with 9 residential units above (7 x 2 bedroom & 2 x 3 bedroom), together with the provision of bicycle and refuse stores, landscaping and amenity space, terraces and a pergola in the rear garden.

The Committee noted the report and that the main issues were:

·       Principle of Development

·       Housing

·       Urban Design

·       Impact on Adjoining Properties

·       Transport

·       Sustainable Development

·       Natural Environment

Following members’ enquiries related to change to the use of the social club, balconies, parking, and height.

The Officer advised Members that planning permission would be required if developers wished to change the use of the social club.

It was advised that the unit located on the first floor did not have a balcony, due to the flat’s location above the external terrace and canopy for the social club. It was not considered appropriate to include a balcony on the side of the scheme, as it would appear incongruous. The Team Leader advised Members the architects present at the meeting, would be able to provide clarification.

The Officer confirmed that following the findings of the Parking Survey, a contribution would be secured towards a future Controlled Parking Zone (CPZ) consultation. It was advised the consultation would not necessarily guarantee a CPZ as the outcome. The Team Leader reiterated the Officers advice.

The Officer acknowledged that the proposed development would introduce a scale of development that was clearly greater than the existing two storey building. It was also acknowledged that the proposed five storey building would represent a significant change to the existing outlook from these properties. However, the separation distance to these properties were considered sufficient to prevent the impact from being overbearing, given that it would ensure that views either side of the site were retained. The Team Leader confirmed the architects would provide further clarification.

The agent, on behalf of the applicant addressed the Committee describing of the: layout of the scheme, height, flat roof instead of pitch, units, balconies, noise mitigation, daylight assessments, landscaping, the reduced footprint, green and blue roofs, leisure space, scheme colour, outlook assessment, parking and ecological improvement. The agent assured Members that the local authority’s core policies had been met, consultations were detailed and the development design was supported by the local authority and the Brockley Society. The agent concluded by assuring Members the social club ‘will survive’.

Members’ enquiries that followed related to landscaping, cycle storage, solar panels and carbon emissions, balconies, and noise mitigation.

The agent confirmed there was a side path that did not appear to be gated. Its intended use would be for maintenance purposes. It was advised that this situation would be easily overcome by minor alterations to the planting and partitions. Members were assured further details regarding the proposed alterations would be secured as part of the landscaping condition. It was also confirmed that revisions would be secured to increase the space around the cycle stores.

The agent stated the intention would be to move away from the proposed gas boilers to be installed in the residential units. The agent advised an energy assessment had been submitted with the application approximately a year ago. The Officer confirmed that, a condition was also recommended to secure the details of the proposed photovoltaics (PV) installation, to ensure it achieved or exceeded the carbon emission reduction objectives specified in the assessment report.

The agent informed Members the proposed planting was appropriate to the landscape environment. It was advised the intention to keep the terrace small was deliberate, to prevent people overpopulating that space and generating noise. It was emphasised the canopy would also absorb noise, when users of the social club moved out onto the terrace.

The agent confirmed there was no balcony proposed above the canopy, due to aesthetics. Clarification regarding the location of the canopy was provided to Members. In addition, it was felt the canopy differentiated the social club from the residential accommodation.

The agent informed the Committee due to the current situation, the social club did not bother to re-apply for music license. It was confirmed in the future there would be live music. The agent advised the developers would look at noise mitigation measures to protect the residential flats. The agent acknowledged the importance of noise mitigation efforts to protect the residents. The Officer confirmed condition 15 of the Management Plan could be approved by officers. This would enable the implementation of some of the noise mitigation measures recommended by the noise reports submitted to the local authority. The Officer also advised all residents prior to occupation would receive a welcome pack which would clearly outline that the property they would occupy, shared a building with a social club and that a degree of noise and other disturbance could be expected.

The Team Leader advised the Committee that the Agent of Change principle placed the responsibility for mitigating impacts from existing noise and other nuisance-generating activities or uses on the proposed new noise-sensitive development.

A representative addressed the Committee, advising that residents were opposed to the proposal because of concerns related to the overbearing visual impact, loss of daylight and sunlight, loss of privacy, parking, increased noise and disturbance, design and materials, disruption from construction, amenity space and the lack of affordable housing.

Member’s enquiries related to density, height, family housing, viability, amenity space, the developer’s intentions, air quality and, communities use.

The Officer advised due to the developments PTAL 4 rating, officers deemed the density of the scheme as appropriate.

The Officer compared the various development heights located in the local area. It was advised that the proposed building would therefore be appropriate and would not be out of character with the building heights within the local environment.

The Officer stated as the development was a 9 unit scheme, there were no requirements for family housing on this particular scheme. It was felt the provision of 9 residential units, which did include 2 family sized dwellings, would contribute towards the borough’s housing requirement.

The Team Leader also provided clarification regarding the viability of the scheme. The Committee were advised there was no viability requirement since there was no requirement for the proposed development to include affordable housing.

The Team Leader assured the Committee that amenity requirements had also been met in accordance with the London Plan.

The Team Leader advised Members the intentions of the developer were not material to consideration Members were reminded to adhere to material considerations only.

The Officer confirmed that the scheme was developed with balconies or external terraces to address concerns with regard to air quality.

The Officer also advised that the s106 agreement could be used to secure a minimum of 15 hours community access. This was not currently a requirement for the social club.

During the members’ discussion, it was proposed the application should be granted with a condition that gas boilers were installed in the units as a last resort. It was agreed that officers would formalise the wording of the condition.

Earlier a Member lost their remote connection to the Committee meeting. The Member advised they would not be able to participate in the forthcoming vote on the planning application for item 3 on the Agenda.

Members voted on the recommendation in the report with a result of 7 in favour of the proposal and 1 against.

The Committee

RESOLVED

That it be noted that the Committee agreed to:

GRANT planning permission for the demolition of existing social club at 240-242 Brockley Road SE4 and the construction of a part four/part five storey building including:

·       basement comprising new social club with 9 residential units above (7 x 2 bedroom & 2 x 3 bedroom), together with the provision of bicycle and refuse stores, landscaping and amenity space, terraces and a pergola in the rear garden.

Subject to conditions and informatives outlined in the report and,

A requirement that officers should:

·       Add a condition requiring the implementation of gas boilers into the scheme, be a last resort measure after other options are considered.

The meeting was adjourned at 21.01pm and reconvened at 21.10 pm.