Agenda item

The Planning Officer gave an illustrative presentation recommending to refuse the planning application.

The application site comprises a small area of open space which is bounded on two sides by a knee high decorative fence. A group of five trees subject to a TPO are located on the application site itself. A further tree with a TPO attached is located just beyond the site on the remaining open space, which is owned by the Council.

The remaining area of Council owned open space which, excluding the application site, is a strip of land linking Duncombe Hill and Brockley Rise. The Crofton Park Ward information board faces Brockley Rise at the edge of this area.

A commercial centre and shopping parade are located along the eastern side of Stondon Road and Brockley Rise approximately 100 metres north of the site before the two roads merge to become Brockley Rise. This commercial character continues for a small section on the western side of Brockley Rise between Gabriel Street and

Ackroyd Road, which is opposite the northern part of the application site. Honor Lea, a three storey purpose built residential institution is directly opposite the southern part of the site.

To the east of the site the land steeply rises towards Blythe Hill fields, with a residential area of suburban perimeter blocks. To the west towards Honor Oak is a residential area of urban terrace perimeter blocks. Southwards along Brockley Rise the character is predominantly residential with a mix of two and three storey buildings.

The Officer recommendation to refuse the application is based on the fact that the development would have unacceptable impact on the character and amenity of the existing open space. It would create an unwelcoming environment to the existing Council land where the proposed development would be built on. The lack of privacy for future occupiers is also a reason for refusal, where the design is discordant with the surrounding environment and is too tall taking account of its prominent location, it is also flawed seen in the flats which would overlook the bus stop.

The removal of five mature trees in addition to the fact the landscape visualisations are misleading and unlikely to accurately reflect its appearance.

In giving his statement, the Objector endorsed the planning officer’s presentation and emphasised that building any development on this site is unacceptable and that the Committee should consider the disregard that the developer has shown in his application and by his absence.

The Objector furthered that historic maps of the area date back to 1761, which shows that this site has never been built on in all this time which highlights a tangible link to the past when the area was an open countryside. In policy terms, the application site is an open space- paragraph 97 as highlighted in the report says that existing open space should not be built on unless 3 exceptions are satisfied, of which none are satisfied. From the perspective of the community, this is an open space that holds real value and there are only 2 open spaces along the entire length of Brockley Rise and is surrounded by houses and is well used by the community. There have been no issues of fly-tipping or any other anti-social behaviour which speaks highly of the area and community. Lastly, the intentional building of an illegal fence which has been taken down, speaks volumes of the disregard for the law and the area the developer has shown.

Councillor Anwar also spoke on this item. 5000 people signed a petition to have the illegal fence removed which the developer built outside of planning permission. There was a lot of rubbish and litter left around the area once the fence was removed. The report mentioned that this is a non-material objection, however, Councillor Anwar wanted to point out that if the developer has done any illegal action on the land before planning application has been granted, then this should be taken into consideration when making a decision. There has also been no local engagement from the developer despite the invitations to engage and discuss the construction. Any open plan development should only be done if completely necessary and if the space is no longer in use, and this is not the case.

The Legal Adviser pointed out that the term “illegal” being used to describe the building of the fence is incorrect. Although permission was not given, the construction of the fence itself was not illegal and the Committee noted this.

The committee noted the report. All Members voted against the application.

RESOLVED

That planning permission be REFUSED for the Construction of a part three/part four storey building on land at the corner of Duncombe Hill and Brockley Rise SE23, to provide 6 two bedroom and 1 one bedroom self-contained flats, together with landscaping, cycle storage and bin stores, for the reasons set out in paragraph 11 of the report.