Venue: Committee Rooms 1 & 2 - Civic Suite. View directions
Contact: Claudette Minott
No. | Item |
---|---|
Declarations of Interests PDF 204 KB Decision: None. Minutes: None were made. |
|
Additional documents: Decision: Approved subject to the recording of Councillor Sheikh’s apologies for the September meeting. Minutes: RESOLVED that the minutes of the meeting held on September 5 2019 be approved subject to the recording of Councillor Sheikh’s apologies for the meeting. |
|
125-131 Kirkdale Committee Report PDF 997 KB Additional documents: Decision: RESOLVED that planning permission be granted subject to the following conditions and informatives:
CONDITIONS: 1.STANDARD TIME CONDITION
The development to which this permission relates must be begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date on which the permission is granted.
Reason: As required by Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.
2. DEVELOPMENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH APPROVED PLANS
The development shall be carried out strictly in accordance with the application plans, drawings and documents hereby approved and as detailed below:
P2-05; P2-06; P3-01 Rev.A; PA-02; A2-01 Rev.A; A4-01 Rev.C; A4-02 Rev.A; A4-03 Rev.A; A6-03; NOV-XX-XX-DR-M-5701; 615/SE26/20/1_SLP01
Reason: To ensure that the development is carried out in accordance with the approved documents, plans and drawings submitted with the application and is acceptable to the local planning authority.
3. BUILDING FABRIC SOUND INSULATION
(a) The building shall be designed so as to provide sound insulation against external noise and vibration, to achieve levels not exceeding 30dB LAeq (night) and 45dB LAmax (measured with F time weighting) for bedrooms, 35dB LAeq (day) for other habitable rooms, with window shut and other means of ventilation provided. External amenity areas shall be designed to achieve levels not exceeding 55 dB LAeq (day) and the evaluation of human exposure to vibration within the building shall not exceed the Vibration dose values criteria ‘Low probability of adverse comment’ as defined BS6472.
(b) Following implementation of the sound insulation scheme pursuant to part (a), a compliance report, prepared by a suitably qualified sound engineer, must be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
(c) The development shall not be occupied until the sound insulation scheme and all recommendations outlined in the submitted Noise and Vibration Assessment (Hepworth Acoustics dated November 2019), and any subsequent recommendations arising from the compliance report pursuant to part (b) have been implemented in full. Thereafter, the sound insulation scheme shall be maintained in perpetuity in accordance with the approved details.
Reason: To safeguard the amenities of the occupiers of the proposed dwellings and to comply with DM Policy 26 Noise and vibration, DM Policy 31 Alterations and extensions to existing buildings including residential extensions, DM Policy 32 Housing design, layout and space standards, and DM Policy 33 Development on infill sites, backland sites, back gardens and amenity areas of the Development Management Local Plan (November 2014).
4.SOUNDPROOFING BETWEEN RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL
(a) The development shall be designed to incorporate soundproofing of a specification for sound insulation against airborne noise to meet D’nT,w + Ctr dB of not less than 55 for walls and/or ceilings where residential parties non domestic.
(b) Following implementation of the soundproofing pursuant to part (a), a compliance report, prepared by a suitably qualified sound engineer, must be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
(c) The development shall not be occupied until the soundproofing and all recommendations outlined in the submitted Noise and Vibration Assessment (Hepworth Acoustics dated November 2019), and any subsequent ... view the full decision text for item 8. Minutes: The report was introduced by the Planning Officer, Samuel James, who outlined the proposals, the key planning considerations and the objections which had been received. He confirmed the application was partly retrospective but that it was very similar to a prior application which had previously been given permission.
Councillor Sheikh asked if any affordable housing would be provided within the development and was informed that as less than 10 units were involved none could be required.
Councillor Clarke received confirmation that the management of outdoor space was conditioned and that noise controls would be within national standards and acceptable living conditions would be achieved.
Tim Cropper, a Planning Consultant next made a presentation. He related the planning history subsequent to the closure of the pub in 2013. He explained the several flaws in the original application which he attributed to the previous property owner. The cumulative changes that were required had led him to conclude that a new application was needed.
Councillor Sheikh reiterated her concerns about the general lack of sufficient affordable housing in the borough. Mr Cropper said he understood the viewpoint and pointed out boroughs such as Lambeth and Islington had different policies which required the consideration of affordable housing in all developments. He said he promoted developments which accorded with planning policies and that it was not financially viable in this case to offer affordable units that were not dictated by extant policy.
Mary McKernan of the Sydenham Society spoke in objection to the application. She expressed surprise that no reference had been made to the dismissal of an appeal by the applicant on the grounds of significant departure from the initially approved plans. She expressed concerns about the lack of scale drawings, ceiling heights, potential noise, bicycle storage, use of outside space and the site planning history. She believed habitable room sizes were below minimum standards and that windows of separate flats would face one another directly at half the minimum required distance She said granting permission could set a dangerous precedent.
Planning Team Leader, Angus Saunders, said he was not aware of the Inspectorate’s September 20 decision and would investigate further internally. However he indicated the decision vindicated the stance taken by Planning Officers who did not believe a minor material amendment application was sufficient and that the process demanding a full planning consideration was the correct option.
In the general debate on the application, members sought assurances that the ground floor pub would be retained and was viable. Planning officers pointed out the Council had robust pub protection policies in place. Additionally fit out was required before any residential units could be occupied and any future change of use would require planning permission.
Councillor Clarke said she had remaining concerns about the ceiling heights, the inability of the proposed pub to be a music venue and the amenities available to potential residents.
Councillor Gibbons asked if any refusal of the application would be problematic given the planning history. The Legal representative advised the ... view the full minutes text for item 8. |
|
37 Deptford High Street Committee Report PDF 410 KB Additional documents:
Decision: RESOLVED that planning permission be granted subject to the following conditions and informatives:
CONDITIONS 1) SOUND INSULATION
The soundproofing shall be retained permanently in accordance with the details as approved in permission DC/19/106558.
Reason: In the interests of residential amenity and to comply with DM Policy 26 Noise and vibration of the Development Management Local Plan (November 2014).
2) OPENING HOURS
The premises shall only be open for customer business between the hours of 9am to 11pm Sunday to Wednesday, 9am to 12am Thursday and 9am to 1am Friday and Saturday
Reason: In order to safeguard the amenities of adjoining occupants at unsociable periods and to comply with Paragraph 120 of the National Planning Policy Framework and DM Policy 26 Noise and Vibration, DM Policy 14 District centres shopping frontages, DM Policy 17 Restaurants and cafes (A3 uses), and drinking establishments (A4 uses) of the Development Management Local Plan (November 2014)
3) AMPLIFIED SOUND
No music, amplified sound system or other form of loud noise (such as singing or chanting) shall be used or generated which is audible outside the premises or within adjoining buildings.
Reason: To safeguard the amenities of the adjoining premises and the area generally and to comply with Paragraph 120 of the National Planning Policy Framework and DM Policy 26 Noise and Vibration of the Development Management Local Plan (November 2014).
INFORMATIVES
Positive and Proactive Statement: The Council engages with all applicants in a positive and proactive way through specific pre-application enquiries and the detailed advice available on the Council’s website. On this particular application, no pre-application advice was sought. However, as the proposal was clearly in accordance with the Development Plan, permission could be granted without any further discussion. Minutes: The report was introduced by the Planning Officer, Alfie Williams who outlined the proposals, the key planning considerations and the objections which had been received to this Section 73 minor material amendment application.
Councillor Clarke received an assurance that there were similar uses in the borough operating with the same time limits and located below residential properties. Councillor Sheikh was informed there were more than 100 properties in the area where residents lived above locations with similar ground floor uses.
The applicants, Graham Loveland and his daughter Rachel, spoke in favour of their application. They noted the objection made on the grounds of the residential character of the area and countered that this was a major district centre with a growing night time economy. Their fledgling business was already governed by Licensing conditions on noise, rear door closure, advisory notices, CCTV and refuse disposal.
Councillor Sheikh noted the use of the Isla Ray premises as a workshop/artistic space and asked about complaints made and charging rates. The applicants replied that use of the space was free of charge and only one complaint had ever been received and that came via Instagram.
Helena Russell, Co-Chair of the Deptford Society, and local resident Harry Richardson spoke in objection to the application. An addendum was tabled on behalf of the Deptford Society calling for the application to be deferred to allow a meeting to take place with council representatives to discuss Lewisham’s policies encouraging night time activity as the Society felt the residential significance of Deptford High Street was being underplayed. The Society stressed they had no objections to the business or reservations about the applicants but believed any impact on continual residential expansion deserved further examination.
Mr Richardson added that he had lived in the area for more than 20 years and he believed the officer characterisation of the area was inaccurate with there being a delicate balance between the mix of residential and commercial uses. He asked that protection be put in place for residents before other uses were contemplated that could degrade the residential element.
The Chair said a meeting with Councillor Pat Codd could prove beneficial but that it could take place outside this planning process.
Councillor Sheikh said a meeting involving Councillor Codd and the relevant Cabinet Member, Councillor Andre Bourne would be a good idea, but that the application should be deferred until that meeting had taken place. Her proposal was seconded by Councillor Clarke and put to the vote but declared lost by 3-2 with 1 abstention.
The Chair, seconded by Councillor Mulddon, proposed that the recommendation to grant permission be approved. The proposal was agreed by 3-2 with 1 abstention. Votes in Favour: Councillors Gallagher, Gibbons, and Muldoon. Votes Against: Councillors Clarke and Sheikh. Votes in Abstention: Councillor Mallory.
RESOLVED that planning permission be granted subject to the following conditions and informatives:
CONDITIONS 1) SOUND INSULATION
The soundproofing shall be retained permanently in accordance with the details as approved in permission DC/19/106558.
Reason: ... view the full minutes text for item 9. |