Council meetings

Agenda item



Home Park Housing Officer, 129 Winchester Road


Planning Manager Michael Forrester introduced the details of the application and explained to members that the application was submitted by Lewisham Homes on behalf of Lewisham Council. Michael Forrester then explained that 100% of the residential units would be for social rent with a commercial space provided at ground floor level. It was noted that daylight and sunlight study has been conducted and concluded that the impact of the development would not be unacceptable to neighbouring buildings. Mr Forrester then stated that on-site parking provision would be restricted to disabled residents and that consultation had resulted in four objections.


Councillor Paschoud asked a question regarding the allocation of the disabled parking spaces. Michael Forrester replied that the applicant would be better placed to answer questions relating to parking allocation.


The committee then heard a verbal presentation from Emma Gittus representing Lewisham Homes and James Scruce the architect for the scheme. Emma Gittus explained that the application would form a key part of meeting the Mayoral target of providing 500 new council homes and stated that Lewisham Homes had held several consultation events prior to the submission of the proposal. Emma Gittus then informed members that the ground floor unit would have a flexible use so could potentially provide a community space subject to consultation.


James Scruce then gave an overview of the design considerations for the scheme. Mr Scruce stated that the existing building is detrimental to the townscape and is the site of anti-social behaviour. Mr Scruce then explained that the standard of accommodation exceeds the requirements of the London Plan and would seek to redevelop Home Park by increasing the level of community and residential activity locally. Mr Scruce concluded by stating that the massing, colours and materials would reflect the locality and urban grain and noted that the design and massing had been reviewed by the Design Review Panel prior to submission.


Councillor Paschoud requested an answer to her previous question regarding disabled parking. Emma Gittus replied that issues relating to disabled parking allocation would be referred back to the Housing Department. Councillor Paschoud then asked whether there would be open plan kitchen/living space as this is crucial for some disabled residents. Emma Gittus responded that there would be an opportunity to amend internal layouts.


The committee then received verbal representations from three local residents Mr R Bailey, Tim Graham and Julia Webb. Tim Graham spoke first and stated to members that the development did not proposed enough parking and that the colour scheme is not in keeping with the 1960s buildings. Mr Graham also stated that the building would overlook nearby properties and highlighted that no children’s play area had been provided which raised concerns as Home Park is not a safe place for children. Mr Bailey noted that a parking survey had been undertaken which raised concerns given that cars are often double/treble parked. Mr Bailey also objected to the loss of storage sheds and stated that too many flats has been provided on the site.


Julia Webb highlighted the development at Our Lady & Saint Phillip Neri School and stated that conditions for the scheme had not been implemented which had created concern amongst residents that something similar would happen with the present proposal. Julia Webb then stated that the development was cramped and was likely to upset long term elderly residents. Mr Graham stated that the scheme would put further strain on refuse collection which is a significant issue on the estate. Mr Bailey also noted that the bins are often left out in the open.


Council Holland asked what the sheds are used for. Mr Bailey responded that the sheds are used for storage for local residents. Councillor Holland then asked for clarification of the concerns raised by elderly residents. Tim Graham replied that the concerns relate to overlooking into first floor bedrooms. Julia Webb commented that there is a perception that they would not be listened to and that many people had given up fighting having been worn out by the Saint Phillip Neri School development. Mr Graham added that there were many more than 4 objectors given that the consultation events often had more than 30 people attending.


Michael Forrester explained to members that all adjoining properties has been consulted and that the Council had received only four responses objecting to the application. Mr Forrester then highlighted that the Highways Department had not objected to the application and that there was a condition for a travel plan and car club. In addition, a number of highways improvements are proposed including new crossings and dropped kerbs. Mr Forrester then stated that the building was a minimum of 21m from the nearest residential property in accordance with guidance. Mr Forrester also noted that many of the concerns raised by residents relate to existing site management and would be raised with Lewisham Homes.


Councillor Paschoud stated that she had attended a consultation event and that there is clearly an issue with refuse and fly tipping and there is an ongoing concern with the Saint Phillip Neri School development. Michael Forrester responded that a refuse management condition would be added. Councillor Holland asked a question relating to the loss of the storage sheds. Michael Forrester replied that this would be a matter for Lewisham Homes however, it was noted that the Highways Department did not object to the loss of the sheds.


Councillor Amrani stated that an informative should be added directing the Housing Department and Lewisham Homes to address the estate management issues. Council Campbell stated that the Saint Phillip Neri School development and Home Park should be added to the list of concerns. Councillor Paschoud moved to approve the application with the addition of the informative and refuse management condition. The motion was seconded by Councillor Holland.


Members voted as follows:


FOR APPROVAL: Councillors Amrani, Holland, Campbell and Paschoud




Resolved: That planning permission be approved in respect of application DC/18/106485.



Supporting documents: