Agenda item

It was MOVED, SECONDED and RESOLVED that the proposal for the construction of residential dwellings (Use Class C3) together with new play space, provision of car parking spaces, cycle parking spaces, refuse/recycling stores and associated landscaping works at Valentine Court, Perry Vale, SE23, be approved, subject to the conditions set out in the report.

The presenting officer gave illustrative presentation of the application.

The proposal was for the construction of residential dwellings (Use Class C3) together with new play space, provision of car parking spaces, cycle parking spaces, refuse/recycling stores and associated landscaping works at Valentine Court, Perry Vale, SE23.

The material considerations were: Principle of development; 100% affordable housing; Amenity of existing and future occupiers; Transport; Landscape and ecology- all of which were considered acceptable and the proposed development scored highly with urban green factor. It was the officer recommendation to approve the application.

It was mentioned by Members, the loss of light in the existing neighbouring properties and it was asked if the loss of light was to do with the balconies. The officer responded that the BRE standard to look at the design of existing buildings and that it was common to see the level of daylight provided.

It was also asked why there were less 3 bedroom properties than 1 and 2 bedroom properties. The officer responded that 42% should be family units which has not been met by the proposal- it was advised that the number of units proposed was optimal and this was supported by the Strategic Housing Department.

Members asked why over 12s do not have much provision of play space as the existing estate does not have specific play space for over 12s. the officer responded that the approach is permitted by the London Plan and that the space is not exclusive.

Members asked the officer to comment on the separation distance from the proposed balcony from the walkway and between the blocks, as it appears very close. The officer stated that in terms of daylight and sunlight and the BRE standards, the distance is compliant but stated he understood the impact on outlook because of the short distance

The applicant was invited to speak and made the following points: the proposal is for new affordable homes- meaning families can move out of temporary and emergency housing into a home of their own. The scheme evolved through extensive pre-application engagement. Since 2020 Lewisham Homes have also engaged with key stakeholders in the wider community and resident currently living on the estate. Amendments have been shaped in response to the feedback. The development will deliver 41 affordable homes. 10% will be wheelchair homes. High quality residential homes meet or exceed the minimum space standards with provate and communal amenity space. All homes have been designed so they have a dual aspect. Additional tree planting, new paving and resurfacing of existing routes will improve the area. Opportunities have been maximised with urban greening and biodiversity net gain. The scheme is being assessed from a heritage perspective which concludes there will be no harm to the ability to appreciate both the significance of the Grade 2 listed Christ church not the special character and appearance of the conservation area. The privacy outlook has been minimised and proposed to be acceptable. Some residents have concerns- they are balanced and answer Lewisham’s pressing need for new affordable homes.

Members expressed concern that there were more families on the housing waiting list and asked what the thinking was behind building less 3 bedroom properties. The agent responded that Lewisham Homes have been testing options and viability testing the issue. The aim was to strike a balance between family homes and optimising the amount of affordable homes.

It was asked if the existing mature trees could stay within design. The agent responded that they had tested impact of trees and the scheme has evolved through this which is why the existing trees around block D had been amended to remain.

The objector made the following points: the proposed construction, although not within the conservation area, affects the area as it is very close to boundary. The separation distance is very short. There are characteristic gaps in the proposed development which are not protected. She stated that the development has the potential to set very bad precedent. There will loss of views from the conservation area and less daylight/sunlight coming through the existing homes on Gainsborough Rd. Community engagement has not resulted in any design amendments to block A. The development will affect health of trees as there will be incursion along their roots. A lot of screening in the area is also reliant on trees.

The officer responded to the objector’s comments stating that the conservation officer has been consulted and has identified the harm to the conservation area and is detailed in the officer report. When harm is found in a heritage asset they must first quantify what the harm is and balance the harm against the public benefits of the scheme- it was quantified at the lower end of substantial harm.

Councillor John Paschoud addressed the meeting under standing orders. He made the following points: The development is substantial. He stated that he agrees on impact and issue of Christmas conservation area. He also stated that officers are correct in their assessment in the report. The harms identified have been fairly. He stated that it is important to consider both the existing 100 Residents of valentine court and of 41 additional residents. Overall there are benefits to an additional pedestrian crossing making it an even safer area. The improvements to play area and improvements to greenery of estate should be noted. He concluded that the officer report was a fair assessment.

After discussing the proposal, members moved to vote on the application. It was MOVED, SECONDED and RESOLVED to approve the application.