Agenda, decisions and draft minutes

RESOLVED that the Minutes of meeting of Planning Committee C, held on 21 July 2022, be confirmed and signed as a correct record.

Councillor Tauseef Anwar declared a pecuniary interest in relation to Item 3 of the report, “39-43 Eddystone Road, London, SE4 2DE”, advising that he spoke against the proposal at a meeting which was conducted by councillors and community members, and that his opposing view in that regard remained unchanged.

RESOLVED

That it be agreed to grant planning permission, subject to conditions and informatives outlined in the report for:

·                The demolition of existing community building and associated outbuildings at 39-43 Eddystone Road SE4 ;and

·                The construction of a three storey building to provide:

o    6 self-contained flats ( 3 x 1 Bed, 1 x 2 Bed & 2 x 3 Bed), together with community space at ground floor level (Use Class F), landscaping, external bin store, and

o    11 cycle spaces, with pedestrian and cycle access onto Buckthorne Road and Brockley Path.

And to further reinforce conditions 6 and 28 regarding sound insulation and restriction on amplified music, a new condition should be added to state:

·                That potential occupiers of the flat above the ground floor level on the site should be given a welcome pack, with information detailing the use of the community space.

Councillor Tauseef Anwar left the room and did not take part in the discussion or vote on the Officer’s recommendation relating to this Item, as he had declared a pecuniary interest.  It was noted that Councillor Anwar spoke against the proposal at a meeting which was conducted by councillors and community members, and that his opposing view had remain.

3.1     The Planning Officer gave an illustrative presentation of the report, advising the Committee to agree the recommendations therein.

3.2     In considering the report, the Committee noted the following:

·            That the proposal was brought for a decision following a recommendation by Members to defer consideration of the application at a meeting of the Committee held on 30 September 2021 to allow an additional ecological survey of the area and review the Asset of Community Value (ACV) position of the existing building on the proposed site, known as The Royal British Legion Community Hall.

·            That the proposed site location comprised of a triangular plot of land on the south-westerly corner junction of Eddystone Road and Buckthorne Road, “Brockley Path”.

3.3     Councillor Jacq Paschoud, the Chair of the Committee, echoed statement made by the Planning Officer to highlight that the recommendation in the report required Members to agree works to demolish the existing community building, which was in disrepair, and associated outbuildings, and to construct a three-storey building. 

3.4     In response to questions for clarification, the Planning Officer informed the Committee as follows:

·            That the main issues considered by officers when formulating the proposal were related to the principle of development, housing urban design, impact on adjoining properties, transport, sustainable development, and the natural environment.  It was stated that the Members were under a duty to have regard to the applicable policies relating to those issues as material considerations when deciding on the proposal.

·            That the Council’s Highways Team and Ecological Regeneration Team raised no objection the proposal, subject to the relevant conditions in the report.

·            That no comment was submitted by the Tree Officer regarding the proposal.

·            That the bat survey for which consideration of the application under consideration was deferred on 30 September 2021 had been undertaken, and a report on the findings had been produced.

·            That the existing building had been assessed and confirmed as an ACV.

·            That a public pathway mentioned about in the report was situated on the southern end between the site and the boundary line of 66 Buckthorne Road.

·            That the proposed three-storey building to be constructed would provide:

o           6 self-contained flats;

o           community space at ground floor level;

o           landscaping, external bin store and 11 cycle spaces; with

o           pedestrian and cycle access onto Buckthorne Road and Brockley Path.

·            That although conditions 6 and 28 had addressed matters relating to the mitigation of sound insulation and restriction on amplified music.  the Committee could reinforce the provisions with a further condition for a welcome pack with details about the use of the community space to be provided to future occupiers of the flat above the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 3.

RESOLVED

Unanimously

That it be noted that the Committee is satisfied with the information submitted, and subject to informatives outlined in the report, agreed to the discharge of Condition 3 Construction Management Plan of the planning permission DC/21/123262 for:

·                     The demolition of existing garages at the rear of 4 - 24 Blythe Vale SE6 (land on the west side of Blythe Vale) and

·                     The erection of 9 dwellings, with associated hard and soft landscaping, car parking, cycle parking and refuse storage.

Councillor Tauseef Anwar declared a pecuniary interest in relation to Item 3, “39-43 Eddystone Road, London, SE4 2DE”, and he left the room during consideration of the proposal and the recommendations.

The meeting noted that Councillor Anwar returned to the room during consideration of this Item and remained until the close of the meeting. 

4.1     The Planning Officer gave an illustrative presentation of the report, advising the Committee to agree the recommendations therein.

4.2     The Committee noted that the proposal was in relation to submission of details of the Construction Management Plan in compliance with Condition 3 of planning application referenced DC/21/123262 dated 25 February 2022 for:

·            Demolition of existing garages at the rear of 4-24 Blythe Vale SE6 (land on the west side of Blythe Vale); and

·            The erection of 9 dwellings, with associated hard and soft landscaping, car parking, cycle parking and refuse storage.

4.3     In considering the report, the Committee noted the following:

·               That the main issues considered by officers when formulating the proposal were whether the submitted Construction Management Plan was acceptable and covered the requirement of Condition 3 in relation to transport and amenity impact on the living conditions of those residing in neighbouring properties.

·               That the Council’s specialists in the Highways Team and the Environment Protection Team assessed the technical details and raised no objections to the proposal.

4.4     In response to questions raised, the Committee noted clarifications by Planning officers as follows:

·            That during construction phase all vehicles would be limited to 10 meters long as that was the largest vehicle size that could access the development site to prevent damage to the party walls including boundary walls and fences.

·            There would be a hoarding around the site during the construction period.

·            That an operative trained banksman and traffic marshal would direct vehicle movements.

·            That 8 on-street parking suspensions would be applied by the Council, to ensure the manoeuvring of large vehicle would be in line with its Local Policy guidance.

·            That deliveries would be restricted between 9:30 to 14:30 during school term time to reduce the impact on the traffic flows and safety.

·            That the Council would not be policing restrictions on delivery activities during construction work on the site as the applicant would be required to comply with the planning obligations in a manner which would minimise possible noise, disturbance, and pollution to neighbouring properties, and comply with policy requirements for improving air quality, and for managing deliveries and servicing during construction work.

·            That regarding the management of deliveries during construction on the proposed site, the Council would take enforcement actions if there was a breach of legal obligations, but not necessarily where the developer had agreed a voluntary arrangement with the Council.

4.5     The agent for the applicants also responded to a question advising the Committee that the applicants were expected to comply to their organisation’s risk assessment as part of the planning obligations.

4.6     Following a direction by the Chair of the Committee, Councillor Jacq Paschoud, Councillor Stephen Penfold  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.

RESOLVED

Unanimously

That it be agreed to grant planning permission, subject to a S106 Legal agreement in the terms set out in Section 10 of report, and conditions and informatives outlined in the report for:

·                     The construction of a three-storey, four-bedroom dwelling house on land at the corner of Burnt Ash Road and Dorville Road, SE12, together with bin and bike shed, replacement street trees and associated landscaping;

·                     and an additional requirement:

o        That implementation shall remain Class C3 Use (dwelling house), and that any change by the applicant to Class C4 Use (large shared home of multiple occupancy of over six people) be subjected to a planning application for consideration by the Planning Authority.

5.1     The Planning Officer gave an illustrative presentation of the report, advising the Committee to agree the recommendations therein.

5.2     The Committee noted that the recommendations were in relation to a proposal for the construction of a three-storey, four-bedroom dwelling house on land at the corner of Burnt Ash Road and Dorville Road, SE12, together with bin and bike shed, and the replacement of street trees and associated landscaping.

5.3     In considering the report, the Committee noted the following:

·            That the main issues considered by officers when formulating the proposal were the principle of development, housing urban design, impact on adjoining properties, transport, sustainable development, and the natural environment.  It was stated that in reaching a decision, Members were under a duty to have regard to them as material considerations.

·            That the Council’s specialists in the Highways Team had raised no objection to the proposal, subject to the relevant conditions outlined in the report.

·            That the Ecological Regeneration Team commended the biodiversity improvements to be achieved because of the proposal.

·            That the Council’s Conservation Team raised concerns about the site’s suitability for development, but the Planning Case Officer was satisfied that there were mitigation factors against those.

5.4     In response to questions raised, the Committee noted Planning Officers’ responses as follows:

·            That considering the proposed site’s location within PTAL 3, the car free development to be applied was compliant with the requirement of the London Plan, and therefore considered acceptable.

·            That given the scale of the development as a single-family dwelling, Planning Officers had not considered future Controlled Parking Zones, and a need for a parking survey to be undertaken.

·            That the applicant had not requested a permission to develop a House of Multiple Occupants (HMO), therefore consideration was not on that basis, but on the information in the submitted application. 

·            That Members should be mindful to reach a decision based on the current SPD under which Planning Officers assessed the application under discussion.  Thus, it was for the Committee to apply a balanced judgement about losing one tree, with the provision of new trees, and meeting the Council’s housing targets. 

·            That the Council’s Tree Officer valuation of the matured trees to be replaced was £42,396.  However, Planning Officers considered that the developer’s contribution of £9,000 was fair and reasonable for the following reasons:

o        The Tree Officer’s valuation was not commensurate to the scale of the development.

o        That considering the requirement of the National Planning Policy Framework, the proposal would deliver a family sized dwelling, which would be net-zero in carbon emissions once constructed.

o        That the legal test for financial viability was that contribution should be relevant in scale to the development sort.  It was stated that in the circumstance, the developer’s contribution for the treatment and replacement of trees was appropriate.

5.5     The applicant also addressed the meeting, advising the Committee as follows:

·            That the proposal was for a family-sized dwelling, with net-zero in carbon emissions once constructed.

·            That he considered the history of the area  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.