Agenda, decisions and minutes

Venue: Bromley Civic Centre

Contact: Rosalind Upperton  020 8313 4745

Items
Note No. Item

23.

APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE AND NOTIFICATION OF SUBSTITUTE MEMBERS

Decision:

Apologies:  Cllrs Katy Boughey and Tony Owen

Substitute:  Cllrs Keith Onslow and Simon Fawthrop

Minutes:

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Katy Boughey and Tony Owen and Councillors Keith Onslow and Simon Fawthrop attended as their substitutes.

24.

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

Decision:

NONE

Minutes:

There were no declarations of interest reported.

25.

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES OF MEETING HELD ON 23 JANUARY 2018 pdf icon PDF 125 KB

Decision:

CONFIRMED

Minutes:

RESOLVED that the Minutes of the meeting held on 23 January 2018 be confirmed.

 

26.

PLANNING APPLICATIONS

Section 1

(Applications submitted by the London Borough of Bromley)

Section 2

(Applications meriting special consideration)

Chelsfield and Pratts Bottom

26.1

(18/00037/FULL1) - 62 Windsor Drive, Orpington, BR6 6HD. pdf icon PDF 121 KB

Additional documents:

Decision:

PERMISSION

Minutes:

Description of application – Retention of modular buildings in revised location and installation of brick slip cladding.

 

Oral representations in support of the application were received at the meeting.  Comments in support of the application had been received from Ward Member, Lydia Buttinger, the agent and Bromley Clinical Commissioning Group and circulated to Members.  It was also reported that late letters of support had been received and that all three Ward Members strongly supported the application. 

 

Members having considered the report and representations, RESOLVED that PERMISSION be GRANTED AGAINST OFFICER’S RECOMMENDATIONS. MEMBERS CONSIDERED THAT THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT PRESENTED VERY SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES IN RELATION TO HEALTHCARE, SUBJECT TO THE IMPOSITION OF A CONDITION STATING THAT IF THE PROPERTY CEASES TO BE USED FOR HEALTHCARE PURPOSES THE MODULAR BUILDINGS SHOULD BE REMOVED, and subject to the following conditions:-

“1. The development to which this permission relates shall be completed in full accordance with the approved plans including the implementation of the screening measures and the addition of the brick slip cladding within 6 months of the date of this decision. 

REASON: In the interests of the character and amenities of the area and neighbouring residents and to comply with Policy BE1 of the Unitary Development Plan.

2.  The development hereby permitted shall not be carried out otherwise than in complete accordance with the plans approved under this planning permission unless previously agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

REASON: In order to comply with Policy BE1 of the Unitary Development Plan and in the interest of the visual and residential amenities of the area.

3.  The modular buildings hereby permitted shall only be used in connection with the use of the property as a doctor’s surgery.  In the event of any future change of use of the property the modular buildings shall be removed from the site and the land reinstated to its former condition within 3 months of the use of the property as a doctor’s surgery ceasing.

REASON: In order to comply with Policy BE1 of the Unitary Development Plan and in the interest of the visual and residential amenities of the area.

 

Section 3

(Applications recommended for permission, approval or consent)

Orpington

26.2

(17/03505/FULL1) - Ashling Lodge, 20 Station Road, Orpington, BR6 0SA pdf icon PDF 300 KB

Additional documents:

Decision:

REFUSED

Minutes:

Description of application – Demolition of Nos 20-24 Station Road and redevelopment with two/two and a half storey building to form 27 retirement apartments for the elderly including communal facilities, access, car parking and landscaping.

 

Oral representations in support of the application were received at the meeting.  It was reported that further objections to the application had been received and that a local resident had suggested that if permission were granted a contribution towards travel in the area should be considered together with some additional sustainability measures.

 

The Chairman and Councillor Joel were both in favour of the revised scheme.

Councillor Fawthrop’s view was that the proposed development was too bulky and Councillor Fawthrop and Councillor Auld were both of the opinion that fourteen parking spaces were insufficient.  Councillor Evans was concerned at the lack of affordable housing and felt that the proposed payment in lieu was inadequate.  The Chief Planner’s representative advised Members that the proposed contributions set out in the Chief Planner’s report on page 51, lines 4, 5 and 6 had been independently assessed and calculated using a standard module.

 

Members having considered the report, objections and representations, RESOLVED that PERMISSION BE REFUSED, for the following reasons:-

1. The proposed development would lack adequate on-site car parking provision to meet the needs of the development leading to increased demand for on-street parking in the vicinity of the site, which would be likely to prejudice the free flow of traffic and conditions of general safety in the highway contrary to Policies T3 and T18 of the Unitary Development Plan and draft Policies 30 and 32 of the emerging Local Plan.

2.  The proposed development would fail to provide an adequate level of affordable housing, contrary to Policies H2 and H3 of the Unitary Development Plan, draft Policy 2 of the emerging Local Plan and Policies 3.9, 3.11 and 3.12 of the London Plan.

 

Cray Valley East

26.3

(17/04605/FULL1) - Land At Springvale Retail Park, Sevenoaks Way, Orpington. pdf icon PDF 172 KB

Additional documents:

Decision:

REFUSED

 

Minutes:

Description of application – Erection of single storey building for class A1 and A3 flexible use (coffee shop) with "Drive Thru" facility and associated alterations to site layout and car parking.

 

Oral representations in support of the application were received at the meeting. It was reported that further objections to the application had been received and an email in objection to the application had been received from Ward Member, Councillor Angela Page, and circulated to Members.  The Chief Planner’s representative drew Members’ attention to Councillor Page’s concern with regard to the loss of parking spaces in the retail park and the proximity of the proposed ‘drive thru’ to the residents of Meadow View and he confirmed that a sequential assessment had been carried out recently.  An email from the Agent in support of the application had also been received and circulated to Members.

 

Members noted the Ward Members’ comments and were also concerned with the proposed impact on residential amenity from car engines and headlight pollution and the hours of operation.

 

Members having considered the report, objections and representations, RESOLVED that PERMISSION BE REFUSED for the following reasons:-

1.  Having regard to local knowledge the proposed development would be seriously detrimental to the amenities of nearby residential properties in Meadow View by reason of traffic noise, light and general disturbance associated with the use, the location of the refuse store, the excessive hours of operation proposed and the increase in the level of signage, contrary to Policies BE1, S7 and S9 of the Unitary Development Plan and Policies 37 and 98 of the Emerging Local Plan.

2.  The proposed development would result in a reduction in the level of available car parking at the retail park leading to increased demand for on-street parking in the vicinity of the site, which would be likely to prejudice the free flow of traffic and conditions of general safety in the highway contrary to Policies T3 and T18 of the Unitary Development Plan and draft Policies 30 and 32 of the emerging Local Plan.

 

West Wickham

26.4

(17/05521/FULL1) - 45 Beckenham Road, West Wickham, BR4 0QS pdf icon PDF 136 KB

Additional documents:

Decision:

PERMISSION

 

Minutes:

Description of application - Demolition of existing three bedroom single storey bungalow and erection of two four bedroom detached houses with parking to 2no.cars to front.

 

Oral representations in objection to and in support of the application were received at the meeting.  Comments in support of the application had been received from the agent and circulated to Members.  It was reported that on page 97 of the Chief Planner’s report the second sentence should be deleted.

 

Members having considered the report, objections and representations, RESOLVED that PERMISSION be GRANTED as recommended, subject to the conditions set out in the report of the Chief Planner.

 

(The Chairman used her casting vote.)

 

Petts Wood and Knoll

26.5

(17/05839/FULL6) - 240 Crescent Drive, Petts Wood, Orpington, BR5 1AX pdf icon PDF 75 KB

Additional documents:

Decision:

PERMISSION

 

Minutes:

Description of application – First floor side extension.

 

Members having considered the report and objections, RESOLVED that PERMISSION be GRANTED as recommended, subject to the conditions set out in the report of the Chief Planner.

 

Bickley

26.6

(18/00019/FULL6) - 5 Cloisters Avenue, Bickley, Bromley, BR2 8AN. pdf icon PDF 87 KB

Additional documents:

Decision:

PERMISSION

 

Minutes:

Description of application – Demolition of existing garage, part one/two storey rear/side extension, loft conversion with addition of rooflights and raised deck.

 

It was reported that no objections to the application had been received.

Members having considered the report, RESOLVED that PERMISSION be GRANTED as recommended, subject to the conditions set out in the report of the Chief Planner.

 

Bickley

26.7

(18/00098/TPO) - Land Adjacent to 10 Edgeborough Way, Bromley pdf icon PDF 80 KB

Additional documents:

Decision:

DEFERRED

Minutes:

Description of application - T1 Horse Chestnut – Fell, T4 Holly – Fell, T5 Holly – Fell, T6 Holly – Fell, Fell all Sycamores less than 10cm in diameter, Crown lift all trees in woodland to 3m, SUBJECT TO TPO 109 (A1).

 

 

Oral representations from Ward Member, Councillor Kate Lymer, in objection to the application were received at the meeting. She had been approached by residents’ groups who feared the application was a precursor to development and had visited the poorly maintained site. The horse chestnut tree (T1) was protected and she requested that an arboriculture report be undertaken together with a wildlife study as bats were present.  Councillor Lymer’s view was that if the horse chestnut tree proved to be diseased and required felling then it should be replaced with a horse chestnut tree with a tree preservation order placed on it.

 

Members having considered the report, objections and representations, RESOLVED that THE APPLICATION BE DEFERRED, without prejudice to any future consideration for AN ARBORICULTURAL REPORT AND WILDLIFE STUDY TO BE CARRIED OUT.

 

Hayes and Coney Hall

26.8

(18/00121/FULL1) - 55 Kechill Gardens, Hayes, Bromley, BR2 7NB. pdf icon PDF 121 KB

Additional documents:

Decision:

REFUSED

 

Minutes:

Description of application – Single storey and rear dormer extensions to No. 55 (existing dwelling) with amendments to planning permission ref. 17/00382/FULL1 allowed on appeal for the erection of a 2 storey three bedroom end of terrace dwellinghouse to allow additional accommodation in roof space through the formation of hip to gable and rear dormer roof extensions.

 

The Chairman had visited the site and referred to planning permission 17/00383/FULL1 which had been allowed at appeal.  The Chief Planner’s representative confirmed that permitted development rights had not been removed.

 

Members having considered the report, objections and representations, RESOLVED that PERMISSION BE REFUSED for the following reasons:-

1.  The proposed development by reason of its excessive scale and footprint would constitute an overdevelopment of the site and out of character with the street scene, contrary to Policy BE1 of the Unitary Development Plan and Policy 37 of the Emerging Local Plan.

 

Petts Wood and Knoll

26.9

(18/00107/FULL6) -18 Ladywood Avenue, Petts Wood, Orpington, BR5 1QJ. pdf icon PDF 107 KB

Additional documents:

Decision:

DEFERRED

 

Minutes:

Description of application – Demolition of existing conservatory and garage with construction of a single storey rear extension with a part two storey side/rear and front extensions.

 

Oral representations in support of the application were received at the meeting.

 

Councillors Auld and Joel had visited the site and their view was that the proposed development was out of character with the Petts Wood Area of Special Residential Character.  Councillor Fawthrop concurred with Councillors Auld and Joel.

 

Members having considered the report, objections and representations, RESOLVED that THE APPLICATION BE DEFERRED, without prejudice to any future consideration,to SEEK AN INCREASED SET BACK TO THE FRONT ELEVATION AND AN INCREASE IN SIDE SPACE, IN THE INTEREST OF PRESERVING THE AREA OF SPECIAL RESIDENTIAL CHARACTER.

 

Bickley

26.10

(18/00425/FULL1) - Applegarth, Chislehurst Road, Chislehurst BR7 5LE pdf icon PDF 177 KB

Additional documents:

Decision:

PERMISSION

 

Minutes:

Description of application – Demolition of existing dwelling and erection of a detached two storey four bedroom house with accommodation in roof space and detached triple garage at front.

 

Oral representations in support of the application were received at the meeting.  The Chief Planner’s representative confirmed that line 15 on page 163 of the Chief Planner’s report should be deleted.

 

Members having considered the report, objections and representations, RESOLVED that PERMISSION be GRANTED as recommended, subject to the conditions and informatives set out in the report of the Chief Planner with four further conditions to read:-

“10. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 2015 (or any Order amending, revoking and re-enacting this Order) no buildings, structures, alterations, walls or fences of any kind shall be erected or made within the curtilage(s) of the dwelling(s) hereby permitted without the prior approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority.

REASON: In the interests of protecting the character of the area and residential amenity of neighbouring properties in accordance with Policy BE1 of the UDP.

11.  Before the development hereby permitted is first occupied the proposed window(s) in the flank elevation shall be obscure glazed to a minimum of Pilkington privacy Level 3 and shall be non-opening unless the parts of the window which can be opened are more than 1.7 metres above the floor of the room in which the window is installed and the window (s) shall subsequently be permanently retained in accordance as such.

REASON: In the interests of the amenities of nearby residential properties and to accord with Policies BE1 and H8 of the Unitary Development Plan

12. The development hereby permitted shall be built in accordance with the criteria set out in Building Regulations M4(2) 'accessible and adaptable dwellings' and shall be permanently retained thereafter.

REASON: To comply with Policy 3.8 of the London Plan 2015 and the Mayors Housing Supplementary Planning Guidance 2016 and to ensure that the development provides a high standard of accommodation in the interests of the amenities of future occupants.

13.  Before the development hereby permitted is first occupied the 5 windows proposed to the first floor front elevation (serving the dressing room and corridor) shall be part obscure glazed in accordance with details to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and details of any openings shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and shall subsequently be permanently retained in accordance with the approved details.

REASON: In order to comply with Policy BE1 of the Unitary Development Plan and in the interest of the amenities of the adjacent properties.” 

 

Section 4

(Applications recommended for refusal or disapproval of details)

Penge and Cator

26.11

(17/05574/FULL1) - 100-102 High Street, Penge, London, SE20 7HA pdf icon PDF 132 KB

Additional documents:

Decision:

DEFERRED

 

Minutes:

Description of application – Demolition of the existing building and the erection of a mixed-use development including new post office/shop with ancillary commercial space at ground floor level, together with the provision of 9 flats above.

 

Oral representations in support of the application were received at the meeting.  Comments from Ward Member, Councillor Peter Fookes, had been received and circulated to Members. It was reported that objections to the application had been received. 

 

The Chairman had visited the site and whilst she acknowledged the site was developable in her view the proposed nine flats would be an inappropriate over development and would be detrimental to neighbouring occupiers and Councillor Evans concurred with her.  Councillor Samaris Huntington-Thresher was concerned at the proposed lack of parking and Councillor Joel suggested that six flats would be more appropriate.

 

Members having considered the report, objections and representations, RESOLVED that THE APPLICATION BE DEFERRED, without prejudice to any future consideration, to SEEK A REDUCTION IN THE NUMBER OF UNITS FROM 9 TO 6 AND TO INCLUDE ADDITIONAL CAR PARKING.

 

27.

CONTRAVENTIONS AND OTHER ISSUES

28.

TREE PRESERVATION ORDERS

29.

LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACT 1972 AS AMENDED BY THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT (ACCESS TO INFORMATION) (VARIATION) ORDER 2006 AND THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT 2000

The Chairman to move that the Press and public be excluded during consideration of the items of business listed below as it is likely in view of the nature of the business to be transacted or the nature of the proceedings that if members of the Press and public were present there would be disclosure to them of exempt information.

 

Original Text: