Agenda, decisions and minutes

Councillor Muldoon declared an interest in item 5, Catford Constitutional Club. He said that this building formed one element of the major regeneration of Rushey Green ward and Catford. He had been involved in many hours of discussions of the various elements with officers, developers and prospective developers. Although he believed that he could approach this application with an open mind, he said that in the interests of clarity and transparency, he would recuse himself from the determination of this application.

RESOLVED that the minutes of the meeting of Planning Committee B held on 14 September 2021 be considered at the next meeting of the Committee.

RESOLVED that planning permission be granted for the demolition of the existing garage, alterations to window openings at ground and first floor, creation of first floor terrace, construction of a rear roof extension, provision of cycle and bin storage and hard landscaping to the front garden and other alterations at 11 Wells Park Road, SE26 to enable the conversion of the existing dwelling house into 1x1 bed, 1x2 bed and 1x3 bed flats. This decision was subject to the conditions and informatives as outlined in the report and the added condition requiring full details of the screening to eastern side of the roof terrace to be submitted to and approved by the local planning authority. The material shall be sufficient to maintain privacy and robust in nature, and remain in perpetuity.

3.1      The Planning Officer, gave an illustrative presentation recommending granting planning permission for the demolition of the existing garage, alterations to window openings at ground and first floor, creation of first floor terrace, construction of a rear roof extension, provision of cycle and bin storage and hard landscaping to the front garden and other alterations at 11 Wells Park Road, SE26 to enable the conversion of the existing dwelling house into 1x1 bed, 1x2 bed and 1x3 bed flats.

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

·Principle of Development

· Housing

· Urban Design

· Impact on Adjoining Properties

· Transport

· Natural Environment

· Sustainable Development

3.4      A question was put to officers about the lack of private outdoor amenity space for one of the flats. Members were advised that there were communal areas but with Wells Park close by, it did not outweigh the benefits of the application.

3.5      The agent addressed the Committee on behalf of the applicant. He outlined the proposed alterations, the planning the history of the site, and the benefits of the proposed alterations. He accepted the proposed extra condition requested by members with regard to the privacy screen on the first floor terrace.

3.6      No questions were put to the agent by Committee members and no representatives with objections, were present at the meeting.

3.7       The Committee considered the submissions made at the meeting and

RESOLVED that planning permission be granted for the change of use, alterations and extension of The Workshop 101 Ashby Mews SE4 to create a part single/part two storey live work unit (sui generis) be agreed subject to the conditions and informatives outlined in the report.

4.1       The Planning Officer advised those present, that the presentation previously submitted in the agenda, had the incorrect application number on it and confirmed that it should be DC/21/121526. He gave an illustrative presentation recommending granting planning permission for the change of use, alterations and extension of The Workshop 101 Ashby Mews SE4 to create a part single/part two storey live work unit (sui generis). Members of the Committee noted the report and that the main issues were:

· Principle of Development

· Housing

· Urban Design and Heritage

· Impact on Adjoining Properties

· Transport Impact

· Sustainable Development

4.2       In response to members’ questions regarding street numbering, and height of neighbouring properties, officers advised that the land registry supported Lewisham with regard to the street numbering.

The height of the proposed building at the rear was 5.65 metres, which was the same as the existing building; this height also received approval in 2017. The proposed height of the building was the same as other recently completed properties in the street opposite. The Chair asked officers for clarity about whether a decision on the height of the property had already been approved. Officers confirmed that this was correct. Although permission had lapsed, this application was identical. Officers did not consider this would set a precedent for future construction of two story buildings in the Mews.

4.3       The architect for the scheme then addressed the committee. She said that the planning officer had made a comprehensive presentation and would answer any questions.

4.4       Clarification of a gap between the first floor extension and the gable wall was requested. It was described in paragraph 19 of the agenda as an unusual feature. The architect explained that on the first floor at the front of the properties overlooking the mews, there was office space and a small terrace where windows could be opened for amenity space. The officers showed the detailed plans of the area, gave an explanation of the gap and clarified that the area was uncommon rather than unusual.

4.5       There was discussion about whether the roof space could be enclosed.  Officers advised that this would require planning permission and officers were confident that currently there was sufficient control.

4.6       No representatives with objections, were present at the meeting.

4.7       The Committee considered the submissions made at the meeting and

RESOLVED unanimously that planning permission be granted for the change of use, alterations and extension of The Workshop 101 Ashby Mews SE4 to create a part single/part two storey live work unit (sui generis) subject to the conditions and informatives outlined in the report.

RESOLVED that planning permission be granted for Refurbishment and alterations to Catford Constitutional Club, Catford Broadway SE6 including construction of first floor extension, provision of rooftop plant, external alterations and landscaping works subject to the conditions and informatives outlined in the report.

.

5.1      Councillor Muldoon left the chamber for the duration of the deliberation of this application.

5.2      The Planning Officer, gave an illustrative presentation recommending granting planning permission for refurbishment and alterations to Catford Constitutional Club,

Catford Broadway SE6 including construction of first floor extension, provision of rooftop plant, external alterations and landscaping works.

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

· Principle of Development

· Urban Design

· Impact on Adjoining Properties

· Transport

· Sustainable Development

· Natural Environment

5.3       Further clarification of the cycle space was requested. 15 new cycle racks being installed along Thomas Lane would be uncovered for short stay, as well as covered staff cycle parking in the yard space designed for longer stay.

5.4       In response to a question as to why the report did not include reference to the application being part of the Catford plan, officers advised that the application was received as a standalone application and was assessed as such. The intention   was that it would eventually form part of the wider framework. Officers had held pre application meetings with the applicant, and the focus had been on how, in future, the building would link in with the Catford Town Centre network. Officers agreed that the Catford Constitutional club was pivotal to the regeneration of Catford. The Chair said that the report detailed the external transport and the links with pedestrian access. The hard and soft landscaping has been designed so  that it links through to the rest of Catford.

5.5       The applicant outlined the history of the Catford Constitutional club. Concerns regarding the application, in particular to the scope of works to the former farmhouse, had been noted. The positive comments of the Council’s Conservation Officer was welcomed as was the fact that Georgian Society had no objection to the application.

5.6       The applicant said that proposals were being reviewed from potential operators and a preferred bidder would be announced soon. If planning permission was granted the project would proceed to formal tender and the appointment of a contractor, with a target completion date around mid-2023.

5.7       No questions were put to the applicant by the Committee members.

5.8       A resident then addressed the Committee. She said that she was a concerned resident and against social cleansing in Catford. Information in her presentation had been from the on line planning application form. She asked why it was no longer available on line. The planning officer agreed to look into this.

5.9       The resident raised her concerns about the need to address the problems of sewerage at the premises. She said that the building is the oldest in Catford and asked whether Historic England had been contacted about their views on the application. A second resident said that there had been council reports and newspaper articles about the site being used for social housing. He asked why this decision was not being implemented.

5.10    The planning officer advised that details of the management of sewage, referred to on the planning application form, was  ...  view the full minutes text for item 18.

RESOLVED that planning permission be granted for the demolition of Travis Perkins, Holme Lacey Road SE12 and former car showroom 2 Burnt Ash Hill SE12 and the construction of a building for use as a builders merchants (sui generis) with service yard, car parking, landscaping and associated works subject to the conditions and informatives outlined in the report. An extra informative was agreed: The applicant be advised that details would be required regarding the management of deliveries to the site and how off street parking of HGV’s would be minimised. Specifically, this would be part of a servicing and delivery strategy as required by condition 19.

6.1      The Planning Officer, gave an illustrative presentation recommending the granting of planning permission for the demolition of Travis Perkins, Holme Lacey Road SE12 and former car showroom 2 Burnt Ash Hill SE12 and the construction of a building for use as a builders merchants (sui generis) with service yard, car parking, landscaping and associated works.

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

· Principle of Development

· Employment

· Urban Design

· Impact on Adjoining Properties

· Transport

· Sustainable Development

· Natural Environment

·Planning Obligations

6.3       There was discussion about the site turnings onto Holme Lacey Road. The application was for a new build and there would be an increase in the numbers of HGVs. A number of improvement works should be included in the application. Officers advised that improvement works were recommended and would be secured through a section 278 agreement. The works would have to be completed before operation of the use.

6.4       The Chair asked about the impact of the number of vehicles using the site, and whether the usage would be suitable for Holme Lacey Road. Officers advised that the applicant did not believe that there would be intensified use of the site, rather there would be a more efficient use of the site.

6.5       There was discussion about trucks exiting the site and whether the tracks guiding them to the left would be enforced. Officers advised that the direction of traffic was secured by condition.

6.6       The Chair asked about the change in the elevation to the front of the site which she considered to be intense. She was concerned about the landscaping and the impact of the building. Officers advised that the proposed height of the building was similar to those opposite and was considered suitable as an industrial site. The materials to be used for this type of building were of high quality and officers were confident that it would not harm the street scene of Burnt Ash Hill or Holme Lacey Road. The Chair considered that the colour scheme could have been more sympathetic to the surrounding residential area.

6.7      The agent outlined the history of the site and the significant loss in builders’ merchant branches throughout the city as landlords redeveloped leasehold sites for higher value land uses.  Burnt Ash Works was a functional building and yard which should operate as a builders’ merchant. The existing loading bay would remain in the same location but with a reduction in vehicles coming in and out of the Holme Lacy Road entrance due to the new one-way system from Burnt Ash Hill. This would be an improvement on the existing situation. Although the Noise Assessment concluded that the development was acceptable in noise terms, the applicant had offered to install an acoustic barrier to provide a betterment to occupiers on Holme Lacey Road. This would also be an improvement on the existing situation for immediate neighbours.

6.8       The agent said that Travis Perkins had worked with the planning, design and highways officers  ...  view the full minutes text for item 19.

RESOLVED that planning permission be granted for the replacement of the existing rear conservatory with a single storey rear extension at 32 Oakcroft Road, SE13 subject to the conditions and informatives outlined in the report.

7.1      The Planning Officer, gave an illustrative presentation recommending granting planning permission for the replacement of the existing rear conservatory with a single storey rear extension at 32 Oakcroft Road, SE13.

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

· Principle of Development

· Urban Design

· Living Condition of the Neighbours

7.3       The Architect made a presentation on behalf of the applicants. She outlined the application proposal. She said that 3 objections had been received. The main areas of concern referred to the scale of the proposal, and its impact on number 30 Oakcroft Road. She said that the scale of the proposal already existed to the rear and the proposal to extend to the boundary was similar to an extension approved at number 34. Although there would be impact for number 30, there would not be any worsening with regard daylight or sunlight or change in the 25 degree rule test. In addition, the windows to the side of number 30 were secondary in nature. There were no changes to privacy for any of the neighbours in this proposal. The materials to be used would be of high quality in line with Lewisham’s planning policy and would improve the appearance of the property.

7.4       Members did not have any questions for the agent.

7.5       No representatives with objections, were present at the meeting.

The Committee considered the submissions made at the meeting, and

RESOLVED unanimously that planning permission be granted for the replacement of the existing rear conservatory with a single storey rear extension at 32 Oakcroft Road, SE13 subject to the conditions and informatives outlined in the report.

RESOLVED that planning permission be granted for the construction of a single storey rear extension at 14A Elderton Road, SE26 subject to the conditions and informatives outlined in the report:

8.1      The Planning Officer, gave an illustrative presentation recommending granting planning permission for the construction of a single storey rear extension at 14A Elderton Road, SE26.

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

·         Principle of Development

·         Urban Design

·         Impact on Adjoining Properties

8.3       The applicant attended the meeting.

8.4       Members did not have any questions.

8.5       No representatives with objections, were present at the meeting.

8.6       The Committee considered the submissions made at the meeting, and

RESOLVED unanimously that planning permission be granted for the construction of a single storey rear extension at 14A Elderton Road, SE26 subject to the conditions and informatives outlined in the report:

RESOLVED that planning permission be granted for the construction of a single storey rear extension at 59 Bramdean Crescent, SE12, subject to the conditions and informatives outlined in the report:

9.1      The Planning Officer, gave an illustrative presentation recommending the grant of planning permission for the construction of a single storey rear extension at 59 Bramdean Crescent, SE12.

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

·Principle of Development

· Urban Design

· Impact on Adjoining Properties

9.3      The applicant attended the meeting.

9.4      No representatives with objections, were present at the meeting.

9.5       Members did not have any questions.

9.6       The Committee considered the submissions made at the meeting, and

RESOLVED unanimously that planning permission be granted for the construction of a single storey rear extension at 59 Bramdean Crescent, SE12, subject to the conditions and informatives outlined in the report: