Agenda item

RESOLVED that retrospective planning application be approved for the installation of rooftop safety railings to both the Northern and Southern Blocks of Greyladies Gardens, Wat Tyler Road SE10 (as amended on 24/2/2020) subject to the condition and informative outlined in the report and an additional condition requiring the railings to be painted grey.

The Planning Officer, gave an illustrative presentation recommending the grant of planning permission for retrospective planning application for the installation of rooftop safety railings to both the Northern and Southern Blocks of Greyladies Gardens, Wat Tyler Road SE10 (as amended on 24/2/2020).

The committee noted the report and that the main issues were:

· Principle of development

· Urban design impacts, including heritage impacts

· Impacts on occupiers of adjoining properties

Following a question regarding procedure, the service group manager explained that the planning application had been referred to the planning committee by officers in accordance with the Council’s Scheme of Delegation.

Applicant

The agent outlined the history of the application. He said that the access hatches and the steps themselves had been granted planning permission. The railings were a normal part of the safety product. Since planning permission had been granted, there had been significant discussions with planning officers. Part of the proposals had been to paint the steps anthracite grey, which the applicant was willing to do if necessary. The railings were installed because it is the safest way of accessing the roof. Alternate systems had been considered for the railings, including the anchor and hook system but none were considered to be as safe as the current railings.

The agent said that with regard to harming visual amenity, the railings have a negligible impact

In conclusion, the conservation officer and the planning officer agreed that there is not harm to the conservation area nor does it have any heritage impact. The railings are a necessary part of maintaining the building.

Representation

A resident addressed the Committee He said that he was speaking on behalf of eight residents in Dartmouth House and the board of Dartmouth House and all 18 freeholders of the property. He said that this planning application is of concern to residents’ because it affects their lives every day. The fixtures obstruct their view of the heath. The scale of the impact from their gardens and windows is greater than the photographs in the planning report. He requested that members consider alternative low profile safety systems instead of the current fixtures. Contrary to the claims of the agent, it was his belief that there are other viable alternatives which are readily and easily available, including the rope and tether system. Details of alternative safety systems had been given to planning officers.

It was the understanding of the resident, that the conservation officer also wrote to the planning officer regarding their concerns about ‘the negative cumulative impact of the fixtures and recommended the rope and tether system. It was also his understanding that the conservation design officer shared residents’ view that a low profile solution would be a more appropriate design. He recommended that the application be refused and recommend a low profile alternative to replace all steps and railings including around the hatches.

A question was raised regarding the necessity for hand rails which a member considered to be an important safety feature of the building. The resident claimed that if an anchor, bolt and tether system was used, steps would not be necessary. He further claimed that the wrong plans were referred to in assessing whether the additional railings around the hatches enjoyed prior planning permission.

A member asked why the comments made by the conservation officers, and outlined by the objector, had not been included in the report. The Service Group Manager said that the conservation team had been contacted with regard to the application. They had asked for investigations to be made into alternative solutions to the railings and steps. A former Lewisham planning officer met with the applicant, but the discussion did not lead to any alternative system. The comments of the conservation officers had been included in the report but were not verbatim and he explained how officers formulate recommendations.

The agent outlined the different alternatives that were looked into. A roof top tether system was considered but a decision was made that it was not safe enough because of difficulties trans-versing various levels on the roof while extending the anchors to every level and hatch. This was the only alternative that was low profile. The agent explained in detail why he did not consider the previous rope and anchor system to be safe enough. Whilst on the roof, un-anchoring took place where there is a dip in the building and was not safe when accessing the different hatches or going over the various levels.

The Service Group Manager shared some photographs of the railings sent in by the resident. The photographs were shown to all those present. The Chair said that several of the railings were not part of the application.

The resident said that the comments made by the conservation officers were made after the original application. He also claimed that the wrong plans were used and all the railings in the photograph he supplied should be included in the application. The legal officer clarified that the application was only for the four sets of railings, two on each building. Members could only consider, therefore, the impact of the four railings.

In conclusion, the objector said that an alternative solution could be put in place and he asked that they be considered and constructively dismissed.

A member said that the railings constitute a safe way for people to work on the roof and this over rides the consideration of the visual impact for residents.

The Committee considered the submissions made at the meeting, and

Members voted on the recommendation in the report with a result of 7 in favour of the proposal and 2 against.

RESOLVED that retrospective planning application be approved for the installation of rooftop safety railings to both the Northern and Southern Blocks of Greyladies Gardens, Wat Tyler Road SE10 (as amended on 24/2/2020) subject to the condition and informative outlined in the report and an additional condition requiring the railings to be painted grey.