Agenda, decisions and minutes

Apologies: Cllrs Tony Owen and Simon Jeal

Substitutes:  Cllrs Keith Onslow and Kathy Bance MBE

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Tony Owen and Simon Jeal and Councillors Keith Onslow and Kathy Bance MBE attended as their substitutes.

None

No declarations of interest were reported.

Confirmed

RESOLVED that the Minutes of the meeting held on 17 January 2019 be confirmed and signed as a correct record.

PERMISSION

Description of application – Demolition of existing ground floor rear extension and construction of part one/two storey rear extension and dormer together with conversion of existing upper floors to create two x 2 bed flats and 1 studio flat. Replacement shop front to ground floor commercial use. Refuse and recycling provision. Construction of rear boundary wall.

Members having considered the report and objections, RESOLVED that PERMISSION be GRANTED as recommended, subject to the conditions and informatives set out in the report of the Chief Planner with an amendment to Condition 4 to read and an Informative to read:-:-

“4. (i) Details of the means of enclosure for the area for storage of refuse and recyclable materials for all flats and the commercial unit shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to construction of any above ground works.

(ii) The approved arrangements shall be completed before any part of the development hereby permitted is first occupied, and permanently retained thereafter.

REASON: In order to comply with Policy 37 of the Bromley Local Plan and in order to provide adequate refuse storage facilities in a location which is acceptable from the residential and visual amenity aspects.

INFORMATIVE:  You are advised to contact the following address regarding alignment of, connection to or diversion of a public sewer, or adoption of a sewer –

Thames Water 1 Kew Bridge Brentford, Middlesex TW8 0EF

0845 850 2777

Email developer.services@thameswater.co.uk”

PERMISSION

Description of application – Demolition of the existing 2 storey theatre building, single storey classrooms and stores and erection of 2 storey performing arts centre together with removal of trees and replacement fencing and temporary classroom building.

Oral representations in objection to and in support of the application were received at the meeting.  Supplementary photographs had been received from the objector and circulated to Members.

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.

REFUSED

Description of application – Erection of a three bedroom detached dwelling.

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

Ward Member, Councillor Charles Joel, read a statement in objection to the application annexed to these minutes (‘Annex A’).

The Chairman had visited the site and viewed it from the landing window of 15 Sandy Bury.  She objected to the potential impact and proximity on Number 15, being detrimental and out of keeping with the area. In her view the proposed section of the development that would project in front of the building line of Numbers 15 and 17 Sandy Bury was contrary to policy.

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

1.  The proposed development by reason of its design and layout would be out of keeping and character of the surrounding area contrary to Policies 4 and 37 of the Bromley Local Plan and Policy 3.5 of the London Plan.

PERMISSION

Description of application - First floor side extension & ground floor rear 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.

REFUSED

Description of application – Demolition of existing private clubhouse (Class D2) and redevelopment of site for 2 No.1 bed flats and 7 No. 2 bed flats with associated parking.

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

The site was not in the Beckenham Conservation Area but its access was and Councillor Mellor said many local residents had expressed concern at the detrimental affect the proposed development would have on the conservation area.  The site had one single file exit/egress route that was inadequate, unsustainable in terms of residents, and in his view  the proposed would be an intensive backland development that did not comply with the Bromley Local Plan or National Policies.

The Chairman had visited the site and was concerned at the proposed loss of a community facility that had been empty for some time.  She agreed with Councillor Mellor that the proposed residential development would be an intensive use of the backland site with a narrow access way that would conflict pedestrians and drivers with insufficient amenity space.  Her preference was that the wooded area should be retained and she objected to the application.

Councillor Katy Boughey drew Members’ attention to Highway Division’s comments referred to in the report and she also objected to the application.

Councillor Kathy Bance MBE was concerned that the reasons for refusal contained in the report may be insufficient if the application were to go to appeal as the fire appliance/heavy vehicle issue would still exist if the private clubhouse or a lesser future piecemeal development was on the site.

Councillor Suraj Sharma considered it unwise that the property had not been marketed for six months.

Councillor Joel had also visited the site, driven down the narrow access and considered it to be unsuitable for larger vehicles and preferred that the private clubhouse be used for local clubs such as air cadets or for the elderly etc.

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 and a further reason to read:-

REASON 2:  The proposed development constitutes an undesirable form of piecemeal and unsustainable backland development in view of the constrained access to the site and the impact on protected trees, resulting in an overdevelopment of the site with the potential to establish an undesirable pattern for similar piecemeal infilling in the area, contrary to Policies 3, 4 and 37 of the Bromley Local Plan (2019).

REASON 5:  The proposed development would fail to provide a satisfactory standard and size of good quality accommodation for future occupiers by reason of the substandard floor space provisions for the 1 bedroomed units contrary to Policies 4 and 37 of the Bromley Local Plan, Policy 3.5 of the London Plan, the DCLG Technical housing standards and the Mayor's London Housing SPG  ...  view the full minutes text for item 27.5

REFUSED

Description of application – Demolition of existing private clubhouse (Class D2) and redevelopment of site to provide a three storey apartment block comprising of 2 x1 bedroom apartments and 7 x 2 bedroom apartments together with the provision of cycle, refuse/recycling storage, amenity space and associated pedestrian access.

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

The site was not in the Beckenham Conservation Area but its access was and Councillor Mellor said many local residents had expressed concern at the detrimental affect the proposed development would have on the conservation area.  The site had one single file exit/egress route that was inadequate, unsustainable in terms of residents, and in his view  the proposed would be an intensive backland development that did not comply with the Bromley Local Plan or National Policies.

The Chairman had visited the site and was concerned at the proposed loss of a community facility that had been empty for some time.  She agreed with Councillor Mellor that the proposed residential development would be an intensive use of the backland site with a narrow access way that would conflict pedestrians and drivers with insufficient amenity space.  Her preference was that the wooded area should be retained and she objected to the application.

Councillor Katy Boughey drew Members’ attention to Highway Division’s comments referred to in the report and she also objected to the application.

Councillor Kathy Bance MBE was concerned that the reasons for refusal contained in the report may be insufficient if the application were to go to appeal as the fire appliance/heavy vehicle issue would still exist if the private clubhouse or a lesser future piecemeal development was on the site.

Councillor Suraj Sharma considered it unwise that the property had not been marketed for six months.

Councillor Joel had also visited the site, driven down the narrow access and considered it to be unsuitable for larger vehicles and preferred that the private clubhouse be used for local clubs such as air cadets or for the elderly etc.

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

“REASON 2:  The proposed development constitutes an undesirable form of piecemeal and unsustainable backland development in view of the constrained access to the site and the impact on protected trees, resulting in an overdevelopment of the site with the potential to establish an undesirable pattern for similar piecemeal infilling in the area, contrary to Policies 3, 4 and 37 of the Bromley Local Plan (2019).

REASON 6:  The proposed development would fail to provide a satisfactory standard and size of good quality accommodation for future occupiers by reason of the substandard floor space provisions for the 1 bedroomed units contrary to Policies 4 and 37 of the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 27.6

REFUSED

Description of application - Erection of detached three bedroom dwelling house, to include basement, ground and first floor. Creation of associated residential curtilage, vehicular access and car and cycle parking and refuse facility. Alterations to host dwelling including reduced balcony and repositioning of patio doors. Excavation to existing and proposed rear

garden (adjacent public footpath at rear of the site) to create single level amenity area.

Oral representations in support of the application were received at the meeting. Supplementary information had been received from the Agent including an Arboricultural Impact Assessment Report dated 16 December 2016 and circulated to Members.

The Chief Planner’s representative informed Members that the Tree Officer had reviewed the supplementary information from the Agent and the recommendation for refusal remained as stated in the Chief Planner’s report.

The Chairman had visited the site and her view was that the proposed development would be a danger to the well-being of the Beech Tree protected by Tree Preservation Order 2491 and she objected to the application.  Councillor Charles Joel agreed with the Chairman and was also concerned at the proposed cramped space around the buildings.

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