Agenda item

RESOLVED

That it be noted that the Committee agreed to:

GRANT planning permission for the demolition of existing rear extensions and the construction of a single storey extension to the rear of 49 Mount Ash Road, SE26

Subject to conditions and informatives outlined in the report.

The Planning Officer, gave an illustrative presentation recommending the grant of planning permission for the demolition of existing rear extensions and the construction of a single storey extension to the rear of 49 Mount Ash Road, SE26.

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

·         Principle of Development

·         Urban Design and Heritage Impact

·         Impact on Adjoining Properties

No questions put to the Officer by the Committee.

The applicant addressed the Committee. The Committee were advised that the proposal would meet regulatory standards and would have no impact on sunlight, or the developments chimneys. The development would in fact reduce light pollution. Members were informed that no part of the original water closet existed today. Only the footprint of the original water closet might remain. Members were assured the flat roof would not be used as a roof terrace. No railings or access to the flat roof, would be built on the development. The applicant made comments that a local resident in attendance had personal interest and objections, because they were a member of a local conservation society.

A resident addressed the Committee, first by clarifying that they were not representing the local Society in this matter and had recused themselves from the Society’s separate objection. The resident made comments alleging the Council’s handling of the case had been improper. They went on to advise members of their concerns with regard to aesthetics, guttering, impact on neighbouring properties, drains and sewage, gardens, the highway near the development, land slippage and noted issues regarding the Officer’s report.

The Chair noted the comments made by the applicant and the resident, with regard to the local resident in attendance and the Council’s handling of the application respectively. The Chair expressed his concerns with the comments made and advised the matter would be passed to the local authority’s legal department to address.

No questions were put to the resident, by Committee members.

Member’s put questions to the Officer regarding conditions in the construction management plan, applications submitted, service gap, guttering, building controls, applications granted for other extensions,

The Chair confirmed technical conditions could be removed by the Planning Committee, if desired.

The Officer provided clarification regarding the number of extension applications approved. Members were advised that 3 applications for extensions were approved by the Planning Committee over the past 6 years. The Committee was informed that 2 of those applications were approved under delegated powers. It was noted that some of the applications granted, were for extensions larger than the current proposal under consideration.

Bellingham Ward Councillor Alan Hall addressed the Committee, under Standing Orders. Councillor Hall was against the application. The Councillor advised that: legal advice had been received, that he was not a member of the Sydenham Society and that he was addressing the Committee, on behalf of a resident.

Councillor Hall expressed concerns regarding the transparency of the process, regarding the application under consideration, conservation and history of the application site. Councillor Hall asked it be noted for the record that comments made in the Officer’s report regarding the proposal, were inaccurately attributed to him. He assured the Committee he did not speak to the Planning team about the application under consideration.

Councillor Hall gave a historical account of the application site, noting the history of the developments original toilets, sewage and drainage systems. Members were advised if the application were granted, it would allow these systems to be built over. This could give rise to noxious fumes accumulating underground. It was advised that consultation outside of the immediate vicinity of the proposal was not favourable. Concerns had been raised with regard to underground springs and slippage. Reference was made to case law where residents took the local authority to court with regard to the collapse of the local highway, near the application site.

No questions were put to Councillor Hall by the Committee.

The Officer advised members there would be no excavation on the application site. The development would be built entirely in the sunken courtyard area of the application site.

With regard to the historical aspect of the toilet, sewage and drainage systems, the Officer advised none of the original toilet system remained on the development. The Officer stated the applicant had entered into a build-over agreement with Thames Water.

The Officer also advised the gap between the extension could easily be cleared, therefore leaves blocking the guttering was not considered a material consideration.

During discussion a Member commented it was very important that the conditions of the construction management plan, relating to access via the rear of the application site for works, would remain and not be removed from the plan.

Members voted on the recommendation in the report with a result of 3 in favour of the proposal and 1 abstention. It was

RESOLVED

That it be noted that the Committee agreed to:

GRANT planning permission for the demolition of existing rear extensions and the construction of a single storey extension to the rear of 49 Mount Ash Road, SE26

Subject to conditions and informatives outlined in the report.