Agenda item

RESOLVED:

Unanimously

To GRANT planning permission subject to the conditions and informatives set out in the report, and the addendum to it, in order to ensure the acceptable implementation of the development for:

·                     the construction of a below ground decentralised heating network pipeline (main route via Folkstone Gardens and Blackhorse Road) between SELCHP, Landman Way SE14 and Convoys Wharf, SE8.

AND

To GRANT planning permission subject to the conditions and informatives set out in the report, and the addendum to it, in order to ensure the acceptable implementation of the development for:

·                     the construction of a below ground decentralised heating network pipeline (alternative route via Grinstead Road) between SELCHP, Landman Way SE14 and Convoys Wharf, SE8.

The Principal Planning Officer gave an illustrative presentation of the report, recommending that the Committee should approve the recommendation therein.  The Committee was advised that the addendum to the report consisted of amendments to conditions 5 and 6 in light of subsequent negotiations undertaken with the applicant after the main agenda was published.

The Committee noted the report and the addendum to it.  It was recognised that the recommendation comprised of two proposals.  The first was that it should consider a request for planning permission to construct a below ground decentralised heating network pipeline (main route via Folkstone Gardens and Blackhorse Road) between SELCHP, Landman Way SE14 and Convoys Wharf, SE8.  The second request was for the construction of a below ground decentralised heating network pipeline (alternative route via Grinstead Road) between SELCHP, Landman Way SE14 and Convoys Wharf, SE8. 

The Committee received clarification from the Officer that irrespective of the differences, each proposal would provide an opportunity to reduce carbon emissions and improve energy self-sufficiency in the north of the borough, with capacity to extend heating provision to other local homes and businesses.  However, only one of the proposals would be implemented because the applicant had indicated that it would not be financially viable to pursue both.   It was also clarified that the reason why the applicant decided to submit the alternative proposal as a necessary option was to prevent delays in applying for another planning permission to correct deviation from the proposed development plan in the event of potential problems during construction work on the main route.

In response to questions raised, the Officer advised the Committee that statements in the report were clear about conditions to mitigate against the impact of the proposed development on residents and the environment, irrespective of which route the applicant decided to implement.  Thus, although development on the highway via the main route would result in single lane closures, pedestrian access would be maintained throughout the proposed works.  It was confirmed that the same measures would be applied for the alternative option, except that a full street closure for vehicular access would be required at weekends when undertaking works under the railway bridge through the route map.  In his closing statement of the issues, the Officer gave an assurance to the Committee that the activities would form part of detailed mitigation measures in a Construction Management Plan (CPN) and a Traffic Management Plan (TPN) to be agreed prior to construction of the proposed site.

Specific to an enquiry on ecology, the Officer advised the Committee that assessments undertaken by the Council’s Ecological Officers confirmed that statements in the ecological report and conditions imposed therein were adequate for the type of application.

The Committee also received clarification from the Officer that the consultation exercise undertaken in relation to the proposed development was considered adequate.  It was stated that in addition to site notices, letters were sent via the post to businesses and residents in the local area.  The Committee noted that only one neutral  comment relating to the impact on businesses was received following the consultation, and that the issue would be addressed by conditions in the CPN and TPM.

The Officer continued responding to questions raised with clarification to the Committee that issues about monopoly in the market place, and the cost of heating to residents when the development becomes operational were not included in the report because they were not matters for planning consideration.  The agent for the applicant however suggested that if required by the Committee, details would be provided as evidence that the proposed scheme would be operated as a heat trust and would be regulated by the Energy Ombudsman to ensure competitive and fair pricing to residents.

The Committee made further enquiry and received clarification from the agent that there would be no disposal of existing boilers because the heat provision was for installation in new homes and businesses that were yet to be constructed within the Convoys Wharf development site. 

In considering submissions made at the meeting, the Committee was of a consensus that the proposals should be welcomed because the creation of decentralised heat network was of strategic importance, and in line with the Council’s Core Strategy.

The Chair was of a view that there should be coherent publicity about the proposal to highlight the Council’s commitment in supporting measures to reduce carbon emissions.  That was followed by a move from Councillor James-J Walsh of the recommendation in regard to the first proposal via the main route.  The recommendation was seconded by Councillor Olurotimi Ogunbadewa and voted upon.

The Committee

RESOLVED:

Unanimously

That it be agreed to GRANT planning permission subject to the conditions and informatives set out in the report, and the addendum to it, in order to ensure the acceptable implementation of the development for:

·                     the construction of a below ground decentralised heating network pipeline (main route via Folkstone Gardens and Blackhorse Road) between SELCHP, Landman Way SE14 and Convoys Wharf, SE8.

Councillor Suzannah Clarke moved the recommendation in regard to the second proposal relating to the alternative route.  The recommendation was seconded by Councillor Olurotimi Ogunbadewa and voted upon.

The Committee

RESOLVED:

Unanimously

That it be agreed to GRANT planning permission subject to the conditions and informatives set out in the report, and the addendum to it, in order to ensure the acceptable implementation of the development for:

·                     the construction of a below ground decentralised heating network pipeline (alternative route via Grinstead Road) between SELCHP, Landman Way SE14 and Convoys Wharf, SE8.

The meeting closed at 8.13pm.

___________________________________

Chair