Agenda and minutes

Councillor John Paschoud declared an interest in item 7 on the agenda as a member of the Sydenham Society.  He did not exit the room as he had not had been involved in the application.  Councillor Bell (chair) declared an interest in item 6 on the agenda as he lives close to the application site.  He also did not exit the room as he had not had any involvement in the application.

Councillor Bell (Chair), asked if Members agreed that the Minutes of the Planning Committee (C) meetings held on 2^ND JULY 2015 were accepted as a true and accurate record. Members agreed and minutes were signed by the Chair.

Before the start of the meeting there was a closed session between Officers and Members in relation to viability.

Before the Planning Officer outlined the details of the case, the officer made a correction to the description of development and Table 1 which outlines the Residential Tenure and Size Mix.  The corrected description of development reads the demolition of the existing buildings and the construction of a part 4/part 5 and a part 3/part 4 storey blocks with terraces and living roofs at 29 Pomeroy Street SE14, comprising 17, one bedroom, 15, two bedroom and 5, three bedroom self-contained flats, together with the provision of 2 disabled car parking spaces, 55 cycle racks, bin stores and communal gardens and associated landscaping.  It should also be noted that the report contained errors relating to the numbering of the conditions.  There were 25 conditions originally proposed rather than 24.

The Planning Officer outlined the details of the case and answered Councillor queries. 

The Committee received verbal representation from Mr Mark Furlonger (the agent).  Mr Furlonger presented the scheme and responded to Members questions regarding the development

Questions and deliberation by Members followed, this included discussion surrounding the opening up of the gate to the rear of the proposed development.  Councillor Bell requested that Officers ensure that the occupiers of the proposed development would be consulted if there was any intention to open this gate up at a later date.  The Planning Officer stated that this could not form a condition relating to this planning application, but it would be noted in the minutes and raised internally if such a discussion was to arise. 

Members also raised concern that the proposed development would give rise to a gated community.

Councillor Bell initiated a motion to accept the Officers recommendation subject to conditions as set out in the report and an additional condition requiring the applicant to submit details of proposed boundary treatment prior to the commencement of the development.  It was seconded by Councillor Ogunbadewa. 

Members voted as follows:

                 FOR:     Councillor Bell (Chair), Ogunbadewa (Vice-Chair), Dacres and John Paschoud.

ABSTAINED:    Councillor Hilton

RESOLVED:     That planning permission be granted in respect of application No. DC/15/91987, subject to the conditions outlined in the report and additional condition (26):

(a) Notwithstanding the details shown on plan 14020B(PA)100C Rev C, full details of all boundary treatments including details of any means of access control into the development shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the LPA prior to the commencement of development.

(b) The development shall not be occupied until the boundary treatment approved pursuant to paragraph (a) has been implemented in its entirety. Thereafter, the boundary treatment shall be maintained in perpetuity in accordance with the approved details. 

Reason

In order to aid permeability through the site and to ensure that the site does not form a gated community in accordance with Lewisham's Residential Development Standards SPD (May 2012)

The Planning Officer outlined the details of the case and answered Councillor queries. 

The Committee received verbal representation from an objector, Mr Ben Forster.  He outlined his concerns in relation to privacy, parking and the density of the scheme.

Members also raised concerns relating to the privacy and overlooking issues outlined by the objector.  Planning Officers suggested that this could be dealt with through requiring details of the proposed balconies as part of the materials condition already imposed.

Following questions and deliberation by Members, Councillor John Paschoud initiated a motion to accept the officer’s recommendation and grant planning permission subject to conditions as guided by officers for application No. DC/15/90064 and amendments to condition (8). It was seconded by Councillor Hilton.

Members voted as follows for application DC/15/90064:

FOR:                Councillor Ogunbadewa (Vice-Chair), Dacres, Hilton, Paschoud.

AGAINST:        Councillor Bell (Chair)

RESOLVED:     That planning permission be granted in respect of application No. DC/15/91681, subject to the conditions outlined in the report and the amended condition (8):

Notwithstanding the details hereby approved, no development shall commence on site until a detailed schedule and specification/samples of all external materials and finishes including windows, external doors and balcony balustrades to be used on the building have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority.  The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. 

Reason:  To ensure that the local planning authority may be satisfied that any overlooking from balconies would be suitably mitigated and that the external appearance of the building would comply with Policy 15 High quality design for Lewisham of the Core Strategy (June 2011) and Development Management Local Plan (November 2014) DM Policy 30 Urban design and local character.

The Planning Officer outlined details of the case and answered Councillor queries regarding the proposal for the demolition of Block D at Hatcham Mews Business Centre, Hatcham Park Mews SE14, and the construction of a two storey building to create  2, two bedroom and 2, three bedroom maisonettes, together with the landscaping of the existing car parking area to create  private amenity space.

The Committee received verbal representation from Mr Andy Puncher (the applicant) and an objector, Mr Daniel McGuiness.  Mr Lee Turner, another objector, joined Mr McGuiness at the table. 

They outlined  concerns relating to loss of views to Canary Wharf, loss of sunlight, impact on native trees, dangerous parking situation, bin storage , the maximisation of profits and lack of neighbour consultation.  The objectors also questioned whether the plans accurately showed the height of the structure.

Further questions were addressed and Members deliberated further. Councillor John Paschoud initiated a motion to defer application No. DC/15/91333 to a future meeting.  It was seconded by Councillor Bell (chair).  Members felt that more information is required to make a decision, especially with regards to impact upon amenity (visual) for neighbours and the cumulative impact of further parking.  The objector invited Members to view the application site from his property.

Members voted as follows:

FOR:                Councillor Bell (Chair), Ogunbadewa (Vice-Chair), Dacres, Hilton, Paschoud

RESOLVED:     that Planning Permission be deferred in respect of application no. DC/15/91333, until further information is submitted to clearly demonstrate the impact of the proposal on the visual amenities of neighbouring occupiers and parking.

Councillor Bell declared an interest in that he lives close to the application site, however, it was not felt necessary for him to not participate.

The Planning Officer outlined the details of the case and answered Councillor queries regarding the installation of two fixed 1080P ip CCTV cameras on a 4m high black galvanised steel pole pointing in both directions at the entrance to Seymour Gardens, SE4.

Members received verbal representation from Mr Charles O’Halon (on behalf of the applicant).  He outlined the purpose of the CCTV and referred to local crime.  He circulated some crime data.

Following questions and deliberation by Members, Councillor Bell (chair) initiated a motion to accept the officer’s recommendation and grant planning permission subject to conditions as guided by officers for application No. DC/15/90303. It was seconded by Councillor John Paschoud.

Members voted as follows:

FOR:                Bell (Chair), Ogunbadewa (Vice-Chair), Dacres, Hilton, Hooks, and John Paschoud.

RESOLVED:     That planning permission be granted in respect of application No. DC/15/90303 subject to the conditions outlined in the report

The Planning Officer outlined details of the cases and answered Councillor queries regarding the change of use of the existing premises at 134 Kirkdale SE26 from Class A1 Shops to a Class D1 cooking studio, together with the alteration of the fixed fascia level board and construction of a rear yard canopy (DC/15/90414).  As the application property is a listed building, this proposal also includes Listed Building Consent (DC/15/90431).

The Committee received verbal representation from Ms Farah Hamid (applicant) who presented the scheme and addressed Members questions regarding the development. 

Members also received verbal representation from the Sydenham Society who outlined their objections in relation to the scheme.  They raised concerns relating to the impact of a D1 use on footfall, the reinstatement of the green stall risers, the placement of cooker hoods in the window bays, lack of refuse storage, fire safety and the positioning of the disabled toilet outside.  There was also discussion surrounding the reinstatement of a right of way to the rear of the property.

Following questions and deliberation by Members, Officers suggested that the concerns relating to refuse are capable of being dealt with via an additional condition.  Planning Officers also agreed that an informative could be added to request that opportunities for the use of the rear access way for refuse collection should be fully explored when a refuse strategy is being prepared.

It was also suggested that an informative was added to the Listed Building Consent to remind the applicant that the condition relating to the restoration of the existing stall risers includes the green stall risers.

In light of the above, Councillor John Paschoud moved a motion to accept the officer’s recommendation and grant planning permission and Listed Building Consent subject to the conditions as guided by officers and the additional condition and informatives discussed above.  It was seconded by Councillor Dacres.   

Members voted as follows:

FOR:                Bell (Chair), Ogunbadewa (Vice-Chair), Dacres, Hilton, Hooks, and John Paschoud.

RESOLVED:     That planning permission be granted in respect of application No. DC/15/90414 subject to the conditions outline in the report and additional condition (3) and informative (B):

                        Condition 3:

                                       (a)       The use hereby approved shall not commence on site until details of proposals for the storage and collection arrangements of refuse and recycling facilities for the commercial unit, have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority.

                                       (b)       The facilities as approved under part (a) shall be provided in full prior to occupation of the development and shall thereafter be permanently retained and maintained.

Reason:  In order that the local planning authority may be satisfied with the provisions for recycling facilities and refuse storage in the interest of safeguarding the amenities of neighbouring occupiers and the area in general, in compliance with Development Management Local Plan (November 2014) DM Policy 30 Urban design and local character and Core Strategy Policy 13 Addressing Lewisham waste management requirements (2011).

                        Informative (B):

The applicant is advised that opportunities for the use of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.