Issue - meetings

Description of application - Erection of two storey rear extension to provide one additional two bedroom duplex flat with own entrance (accessed from Pickwick Way) and to enlarge four existing flats providing them with a new exclusive entrance (access from Kemnal Road); along with minor external and internal alterations to existing building to form an additional one bedroom flat within the existing building (flat 14) in place of former communal lounge and kitchen. Use of existing highway access off Pickwick Way for additional parking (including EV charging) and additional refuse/recycling and cycle storage.

The report requested Members to consider new material planning considerations which had arisen since the resolution to grant planning permission was made on 1 October 2020. The original report to members had contained an error in relation to Paragraph 11 of the NPPF and the application of the presumption in favour of sustainable development. The Chislehurst Conservation Area is a designated heritage asset. The original Committee Report should have made clear that in the event that the policies in the NPPF relating to the protection of designated assets were found to provide a clear reason for refusal, the presumption in favour of sustainable development set out in NPPF Paragraph 11 d) i would not apply. The report offered Members an opportunity to take this into account prior to the issue of a decision which had been delayed. The recommendation to Members was that having regard to the new material considerations set out in the report, the decision made on 1^st October 2020 could be ratified.

The Chairman introduced the report and the Head of Development Management reported that further to the Committee’s original resolution, conditions had been drafted under delegated authority and circulated to Members of the Committee.

Oral representations in objection to the application were received at the meeting. 

Ward Member and Committee Member Councillor Boughey stated that when previously considering the application, she was very aware that the site was situated in the Conservation Area. She explained her assessment of the application and said that as stated in paragraph 3.13 of the planning report, Members had considered that the proposed development would not harm the character and appearance of the conservation area. She said the decision the Committee made originally was the correct decision and moved that the decision be ratified.

Councillor Sharma agreed with Councillor Boughey. He said he will not repeat everything he said at the first meeting as that can be found within the Minutes. He mentioned that the conservation area was discussed at the last planning committee. He seconded the motion to ratify the decision to grant permission.

A motion to refuse the application on planning grounds was put forward by Councillor Bance which was seconded by Councillor Michael.

In regard to the number of declarations made by Members, the Legal Representative referred to the Council’s Code of Conduct for Councillors and Co-opted Members which stated:- ‘Members must act solely in the public interest and should never improperly confer  ...  view the full minutes text for item 29