Agenda, decisions and minutes

All Members were present.

All Members were present.

None

There were no declarations of interest recorded.

Confirmed

RESOLVED that the Minutes of the meeting held on 9 June 2011 be confirmed and signed as a correct record.

(Applications submitted by the London Borough of Bromley)

(Applications meriting special consideration)

REFUSED

Description of application - Veranda to front elevation, car port and garden shed RETROSPECTIVE APPLICATION.

  Oral representations in support of the application were received at the  meeting.  Comments from Councillor Roxy Fawthrop, in support of the application were reported.

  Members having considered the report, objections and representations, RESOLVED that PERMISSION BE REFUSED as recommended, for the reasons set out in the report of the Chief Planner with a further reason:

REASON 3:  The existing authorised Enforcement action, which is currently in abeyance, shall be continued to secure the removal of the unauthorised structures.

PERMISSION

Description of application - Construction of wooden play area including climbing apparatus with maximum height of 2.6m. Erection of wooden shelter with maximum height of 3.3m. Creation of loosefill impact absorbing material surface to south of site.

On page 18 of the Chief Planner’s report it was noted that the recommendation was amended to read, “Permission be refused”.  The Chief Planner’s representative provided details of the planning history to this site.

Oral representations in objection to and in support of the application were received.  Oral representations from Ward Member, Councillor Russell Mellor, in objection to the application were received at the meeting.  It was reported that Environmental Health had no objection to the application.

Members having considered the report, objections and representations, RESOLVED THAT PERMISSION BE GRANTED for the following reasons and subject to the following conditions:

“1.  Details of a scheme of landscaping shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before the commencement of the development hereby permitted. The approved scheme shall be implemented in the first planting season following the first use of the play area and shelter or the substantial completion of the development, whichever is the sooner. Any trees or plants which within a period of 5 years from the substantial completion of the development die, are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced in the next planting season with others of similar size and species to those originally planted.

REASON: In order to comply with Policy BE1 of the Unitary Development Plan and to secure a visually satisfactory setting for the development.

2.  Before the play area and shelter are first used a suitable screen to protect the adjacent properties from noise of a height and type to be approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority shall be erected in such a position along the boundary of the site as shall be agreed by the Authority and shall be permanently retained thereafter.

REASON: In order to comply with Policy BE1 of the Unitary Development Plan and to ensure a satisfactory standard of residential amenity.

3.  The equipment hereby permitted shall be used by children attending the infant school only and shall only be used on Mondays to Fridays and not at weekends.

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

In granting planning permission the Local Planning Authority had regard to the following policies of the Unitary Development Plan:

BE1 Design of New Development

BE8 Statutory Listed Buildings

G8 Urban Open Space

C7 Educational and Pre-School Facilities

PPS5 Planning for the Historic Environment

The development is considered to be satisfactory in relation to the following:

(a)  the appearance of the development within the curtilage of a listed  building;

(b)  the relationship of the development to adjacent properties;

(c)  the impact of then open nature of the site which is designated Urban Open Space;

(d)  the impact on the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.2

REFUSED

Description of application -.Erection of metal mesh fencing on boundary with Bromley Road to a maximum total height of 2.5m; erection of fencing to north of grassed area with single gate to east and double gate to west; replacement double gates on boundary with Scott's Avenue; erection of gate to west of site.

On page 25 of the Chief Planner’s report it was noted that the recommendation was amended to read, “Permission be refused”.  The Chief Planner’s representative provided details of the planning history to this site. 

Oral representations in objection to and in support of the application were received.  Oral representations from Ward Member, Councillor Russell Mellor, in objection to the application were received at the meeting. 

The Chief Planner advised that the proposed 2 metre high metal gate on the boundary with Scotts Avenue would be industrial in appearance and would be somewhat out of character, although it was felt that this was not sufficiently harmful to refuse the planning application.

Members having considered the report, objections and representations, RESOLVED that PERMISSION BE REFUSED as recommended, for the reasons set out in the report of the Chief Planner with an amendment to Reason 2:

REASON 2:  The proposed front boundary fence due to its design, extent, height and external appearance would be harmful to the street scene and setting of the historic listed building, contrary to Policies BE7 and BE8 of the Unitary Development Plan.

(Applications recommended for permission, approval or consent)

PERMISSION

Description of application – Two storey side and single storey rear extensions.

Oral representations in support of the application were received at the meeting.  The Chief Planner’s representative explained the relationship between the proposed extension and the boundary.  It was noted that on page 29 of the Chief Planner’s report the last line should be amended to read, “back 1 metre from the boundary with No. 55 for the first 3 metres in length and as such it is considered the proposal”.

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

PERMISSION

Description of application – Extraction system on roof RETROSPECTIVE APPLICATION.

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

Members having considered the report, objections and representations, RESOLVED THAT PERMISSION BE GRANTED as recommended, for the reasons and subject to the conditions set out in the report of the Chief Planner with an amendment to condition1:

“1. Detailed drawings and/or samples indicating the means of screening/minimising the visual impact of the approved ventilation system shall be submitted to and approved in writing to the Local Planning Authority. The development shall subsequently be carried out in accordance with the approved details by 30th September 2011 and be retained as such thereafter.

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

DEFERRED

Description of application – External landscaping treatment including removal of boundary fencing and gate (LISTED BUILDING CONSENT).

The Chief Planner’s representative provided details of the planning history to this site.  It was noted that objections to the application had been received.

Oral representations in objection to and in support of the application were received.  Oral representations from Ward Member, Councillor Russell Mellor, were received at the meeting.

Members having considered the report, objections and representations, RESOLVED that the application BE DEFERRED without prejudice to any future consideration to await the outcome of a related planning application.

PERMISSION

Description of application -.Erection of fencing to enclose playground areas and ball court and insertion of double gates to a maximum height of 2.4m. Resurfacing of existing hardstanding areas and creation of additional hardstanding.

The Chief Planner’s representative provided details of the planning history to this site.

Oral representations in objection to and in support of the application were received.  Oral representations from Ward Member, Councillor Russell Mellor, in support of the application were received at the meeting. 

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

PERMISSION

Description of application - Side boundary fence in rear garden between Nos. 24 and 25. Max height 2.2 m RETROSPECTIVE APPLICATION.

It was noted that the Ordnance Survey plan attached to the Chief Planner’s report was incorrect and the correct one was tabled.

Members having considered the report and objections, RESOLVED THAT PERMISSION BE GRANTED as recommended, for the reasons set out in the report of the Chief Planner.

(Applications recommended for refusal or disapproval of details)

NO FURTHER ACTION

Members having considered the report, RESOLVED that NO FURTHER ACTION BE TAKEN.

NO FURTHER ACTION

Members having considered the report, RESOLVED that NO FURTHER ACTION BE TAKEN.

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.