4. 62-72 Dalmain Road
Planning Manager Michael Forrester introduced the details of the application and noted that there is an existing extension to the building. It was also noted that the site is within the Malham Road Local Employment Location. Mr Forrester then explained that the consultation had resulted in 8 objections.
Councillor Ingleby asked a question relating to the cladding material. Michael Forrester explained that the extension would have stained timber cladding. Councillor Paschoud asked whether the extension would result in a loss of car parking facilities. Michael Forrester responded that the application is for the extension only.
The Committee then heard a verbal presentation from George Vadekys the architect of the scheme. Mr Vadekys stated that the site was designated as an employment location in which the Council are looking to intensify employment. The extension would potentially facilitate the provision of 22 new jobs, providing space for starts ups. Mr Vadekys explained that the building would be no greater in height than the locality and would respect the residential form of the surrounding area. Mr Vadekys stated that the extension would be more than 30m from the nearest residential building and would have a lighter coloured cladding than the existing extension. It was noted that it would be possible to re-clad the existing extension.
Mr Vadekys concluded by highlighting that a parking study has been undertaken that indicated that the extension would have an acceptable impact on parking stress within the surrounding area. Councillor Paschoud stated that parking stress in the area is caused by the local school and asked whether the study was undertaken at peak school times. Mr Vadekys replied that the applicant was asked to conduct the study during evening hours.
Members then received a representation from Anna Saunders, a local resident, objecting to the application. Ms Saunders explained that she had lived in the area for 11 years and had seen a lot of changes and claimed that the first extension to the building had caused the greatest amount of disruption she had experienced in the area. Ms Saunders stated that the cladding and scale of the existing extension was domineering and out of keeping with surrounding buildings. Ms Saunders then explained that the building is used for uses such as yoga classes, not just offices, which add to parking stress in the surrounding residential area and that the extension would further exacerbate this stress.
Ms Saunders stated that an increase in car numbers would have a negative impact on highway safety concerns given that there is a school in the vicinity and also raised a concern with air pollution. Finally, Ms Saunders stated that the 7am – 10pm opening hours are unneighbourly and would contribute to the loss of the residential character of the area. Councillor Ingleby asked if re-cladding the existing extension would be beneficial to the area. Anna Saunders replied that it would be an improvement but would not fully address the concerns of local residents.
Michael Forrester explained that the purpose of the designation as a Local Employment Location was to increase the employment base within Lewisham, which at present is low. Mr Forrester also informed members that the application has been reviewed by the Highways Department and that the transport impact was considered to be acceptable. Councillor Campbell asked whether a Controlled Parking Zone (CPZ) could be imposed. Mr Forrester replied that a CPZ would need to be proposed by the Highways Department and would be subject to consultation. Councillor Holland asked for clarification of visitor numbers to the site. Mr Forrester responded that the travel plan condition could be expanded to promote sustainable travel.
Councillor Amrani asked if the operating hours could be restricted. Michael Forrester explained that onerous operating hours would not be consistent with the sites designation as a Local Employment Location. Councillor Amrani stated that employment locations are needed within the borough and noted that it was unusual to get an application for an office building at committee. Councillor Amrani then stated that conditions for re-cladding and sustainable travel should be added. Michael Forrester clarified that Condition 4 for the travel plan could be expanded to include sustainable travel for staff and visitors.
Councillor Holland moved a motion to approve the application with the amended conditions. The motion was seconded by Councillor Ingleby.
Members voted as follows:
FOR APPROVAL: Councillors Amrani, Holland, Ingleby and Paschoud
AGAINST: Councillor Campbell
Resolved: That planning permission be approved in respect of application DC/17/104928