Agenda, decisions and minutes

Venue: Bromley Civic Centre

Contact: Rosalind Upperton  020 8313 4745

Items
Note No. Item

6.

APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE AND NOTIFICATION OF SUBSTITUTE MEMBERS

Decision:

ALL PRESENT

Minutes:

All Members were present.

7.

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

Decision:

NONE

Minutes:

There were no declarations of interest reported.

8.

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES OF MEETING HELD ON 14 JUNE 2018 pdf icon PDF 184 KB

Decision:

CONFIRMED

Minutes:

RESOLVED that the Minutes of the meeting held on 14 June 2018 be confirmed and signed as a correct record.

 

9.

PLANNING APPLICATIONS

Section 1

(Applications submitted by the London Borough of Bromley)

Section 2

(Applications meriting special consideration)

Bickley

9.1

(18/00674/FULL6) - 19 Ferndale, Bromley, BR1 2RX pdf icon PDF 76 KB

Additional documents:

Decision:

PERMISSION

Minutes:

Description of application – Single storey wrap around extension.

 

Oral representations in support of the application were received.  Oral representations from Ward Member, Councillor Colin Smith, were received at the meeting. He referred to the five points contained in a late email received from the neighbour that had been circulated to Members.

 

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 with three further conditions to read:-

“8.  Details of the proposed slab levels of the building(s) and the existing site levels shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before work commences and the development shall be completed strictly in accordance with the approved levels.

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.

9.  Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any Order amending, revoking and re-enacting this Order) no building, structure or alteration permitted by Class A, B, C, or E of Part 1 of  Schedule 2 of the 1995 Order (as amended), 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:  To enable the Council to consider future development at the site in the interest of local amenity, in accordance with policies BE1 and H8 of the Unitary Development Plan.

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 change of use of any kind permitted by Class L (Houses of Multiple Occupation) of Part 3 of Schedule 2 or Class C of Part 2 of Schedule 2 of the 2015Order (as amended), shall be undertaken within the curtilage of the dwelling without the prior approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority. 

REASON:  To enable the Council to consider future development at the site in the interest of local amenity, in accordance with policies BE1 and H11 of the Unitary Development Plan.”

 

Shortlands

9.2

(18/01244/FULL6) - 14 Tootswood Road, Shortlands, Bromley, BR2 0PD pdf icon PDF 97 KB

Additional documents:

Decision:

PERMISSION

 

Minutes:

Description of application – Erection of oak gates to the eastern elevation of the property, gravel driveway from house through to end of rear garden and erection of a detached garage/relaxation room.

 

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, subject to the conditions and informative set out in the report of the Chief Planner with an amendment to Condition 4 to read:-

“4.  The building hereby permitted shall be used in accordance with the areas shown in the approved plans solely for: (a) the accommodation of private motor vehicles; and (b) a relaxation room, such purposes to be incidental to the enjoyment of the dwelling house, and shall not be used for living accommodation or any other use without the prior approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority.

REASON:  In order to comply with Policy H8 of the Unitary Development Plan, to ensure that the accommodation is not used separately and unassociated with the main dwelling and so as to prevent an unsatisfactory sub-division into two dwellings.”

 

Cray Valley West

9.3

(18/01491/FULL6) - 4 Sherborne Road, Orpington, BR5 1GW pdf icon PDF 86 KB

Additional documents:

Decision:

PERMISSION

Minutes:

Description of application – Two storey front, part one/two storey front/side and single storey rear extensions. Roof alterations to include front, side and rear dormers, and roof light.

 

Oral representations in support of the application were received.  Oral representations from Ward Member, Councillor Judi Ellis, in supportof the application were received at the meeting.  Supplementary information from the applicant had been received and circulated to Members.

 

Members having considered the report, objections and representations, RESOLVED that PERMISSION be GRANTED AGAINST OFFICERS’ RECOMMENDATIONS. MEMBERS CONSIDERED THAT THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT WOULD NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT THE STREETSCENE OR LOCAL CHARACTER GENERALLY IN VIEW OF THE LOCATION OF THE SITE AND THE PROPOSED DESIGN WHICH WAS CONSIDERED FAVOURABLE, subject to the following conditions and informative:-

“1.  Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any Order amending, revoking and re-enacting this Order) no building, structure or alteration permitted by Class A, B, C, or E of Part 1 of  Schedule 2 of the 1995 Order (as amended), 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:  To enable the Council to consider future development at the site in the interest of local amenity, in accordance with policies BE1 and H8 of the Unitary Development Plan

2.  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 change of use of any kind permitted by Class L of Part 3 of Schedule 2 or Class C of Part 2 of Schedule 2 of the 2015 Order (as amended), shall be undertaken within the curtilage of the dwelling without the prior approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority. 

REASON:  To enable the Council to consider future development at the site in the interest of local amenity, in accordance with policies BE1 and H11 of the Unitary Development Plan.”

 

Hayes and Coney Hall

9.4

(18/02092/OUT) - 143 Hayes Lane, Hayes, Bromley, BR2 9EJ. pdf icon PDF 156 KB

Additional documents:

Decision:

REFUSED

 

Minutes:

Description of application amended to read, “Demolition of the existing dwelling and the erection of a two storey block containing 8 two bedroom and 1 three bedroom flat with additional accommodation in the roof space, associated access, 9 parking spaces, refuse and cycle storage. (Outline application for access, appearance, landscaping, layout and scale).”

 

 

Oral representations in support of the application were received.  Oral representations from Ward Member, Councillor Neil Reddin, in objection to the application were received at the meeting.

 

It was reported that on page 47 of the Chief Planner’s report the first word of the second paragraph under the heading, ‘Highways:’ should be amended to read, “Nine”.

 

There had been a lot of local interest in this application and Councillor Reddin supported the Chief Planner’s recommendation for refusal and the proposed grounds and referred to the paragraph in the Chief Planner’s report under the heading, ‘The Appeal at 145 Hayes’ on pages 46 and 47.  Hayes Lane was a mixture of farmland, semi-detached and detached dwellings and Councillor Reddin objected to a single dwelling being replaced with flats, that would be an over intensive development and out character with the surrounding area.  He also objected on highway safety grounds due to traffic congestion and the view of his local residents’ was that a serious accident was waiting to happen.

 

The Chief Planner reported that a letter of rebuttal had been received from the agent on 7 August 2018 and circulated to Members and that Highways Division had visited the site and had satisfied some concerns but their view remained as stated in the report.

 

Councillor Nicky Dykes had visited the site and objected to the application and her view was that a semi-detached would be more appropriate for the site.  Councillor Michael Turner also objected to the application being an inappropriate development on the site.  Councillor Russell Mellor resided in the Ward and he objected to the application.

 

In principle Members accepted that the site could be developed on a much smaller scale and mass.

 

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 to read:-

REASON 4.  The proposed development would result in the intensification of the use of the vehicular access to and from the site and would be liable to prejudice the free flow of traffic and conditions of general safety along the adjacent highway contrary to Policies T3 and T18 of the Unitary Development Plan, Draft Policies 30 and 32 of the Proposed Submission Draft Local Plan and Policy 6.12 of the London Plan.”

 

Hayes and Coney Hall

9.5

(18/02096/OUT) - 143 Hayes Lane, Hayes, Bromley, BR2 9EJ. pdf icon PDF 150 KB

Additional documents:

Decision:

REFUSED

 

Minutes:

Description of application – Demolition of the existing dwelling and the erection of a two storey block containing 8 two bedroom flats with additional accommodation in the roof space, associated access, 8 parking spaces, refuse and cycle storage. (Outline application for access, appearance, landscaping, layout and scale).

 

Oral representations in support of the application were received.  Oral representations from Ward Member, Councillor Neil Reddin, in objection to the application were received at the meeting. 

 

There had been a lot of local interest in this application and Councillor Reddin supported the Chief Planner’s recommendation for refusal and the proposed grounds and referred to the paragraph in the Chief Planner’s report under the heading, ‘The Appeal at 145 Hayes’ on page 67.  Hayes Lane was a mixture of farmland, semi-detached and detached dwellings and Councillor Reddin objected to a single dwelling being replaced with flats, that would be an over intensive development and out character with the surrounding area.  He also objected on highway safety grounds due to traffic congestion and the view of his local residents’ was that a serious accident was waiting to happen.

 

The Chief Planner reported that a letter of rebuttal had been received from the agent on 7 August 2018 and circulated to Members and that Highways Division had visited the site and had satisfied some concerns but their view remained as stated in the report.

 

Councillor Nicky Dykes had visited the site and objected to the application and her view was that a semi-detached would be more appropriate for the site.  Councillor Michael Turner also objected to the application being an inappropriate development on the site.  Councillor Russell Mellor resided in the Ward and he objected to the application.

 

In principle Members accepted that the site could be developed on a much smaller scale and mass.

 

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

“REASON 1.  The proposed development, by reason of the type and number of units proposed which are not identified as being of a housing priority would be out of character with the pattern of surrounding development, resulting in an overintensive use of the site undermining how the area functions in terms of the movement of people and vehicles as well as the identity of the immediate locality and sense of place contrary to Policy H7 and BE1 of the Unitary Development Plan, Draft Policies 4  and 37 of the Proposed Submission Draft Local Plan and Policy 3.8 of the London Plan.

REASON 2.  The proposed development by reason of its scale, massing and design represents an overbearing, visually obtrusive and inappropriate overdevelopment of the site which would be detrimental to the scale, form and layout and be out of character with surrounding development and be harmful to the residential amenities of neighbouring property and visual amenities of the area contrary to Policies BE1 and H7 of the Unitary Development Plan, Draft Policies 4 and 37 of the Proposed Submission Draft Local  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9.5

Section 3

(Applications recommended for permission, approval or consent)

Chislehurst Conservation Area

9.6

(18/01731/FULL6) - Harley Bank, Manor Park, Chislehurst, BR7 5QE pdf icon PDF 106 KB

Additional documents:

Decision:

PERMISSION

 

Minutes:

Description of application – 2 Storey Side Extension, Single Storey Rear Extension, Extension of existing Basement, Reduced ground levels in front drive to create further off street parking, Removal of a large Sycamore tree and New boundary treatment and entry gates.

 

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, subject to the conditions and informatives set out in the report of the Chief Planner with a further condition to read:-

“8.  Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any Order amending, revoking and re-enacting this Order) no building, structure or alteration permitted by Class A, B, C, or E of Part 1 of  Schedule 2 of the 1995 Order (as amended), 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: To enable the Council to consider future development at the site in the interest of local amenity, in accordance with policies BE1 and H8 of the Unitary Development Plan.”

 

Clock House

9.7

(18/01890/FULL1) - County House, 241 Beckenham Road, Beckenham, BR3 4FD. pdf icon PDF 154 KB

Additional documents:

Decision:

PERMISSION

 

Minutes:

Description of application - Proposed roof top extension to provide seven flats (2 no. two bedroom and 5 no. one bedroom).

 

Oral representations in support of the application were received at the meeting.  It was reported that late representations and further objections to the application had been received and circulated to Members.

 

Councillors Josh King and Mellor objected to the proposed development being an over development of the site on the grounds of density, bulk, mass, scale and overlooking and also out of character with the surrounding properties.

 

Councillors Richard Scoates and Simon Fawthrop supported the application.

 

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.

 

Cray Valley West

9.8

(18/01920/FULL6) - 87 Sutherland Avenue, Petts Wood, Orpington, BR5 1QY pdf icon PDF 89 KB

Additional documents:

Decision:

PERMISSION

 

Minutes:

Description of application – Part one/two storey side/rear extension and two storey side extension including granny annexe at ground floor.

 

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.

 

Kelsey and Eden Park

9.9

(18/01965/FULL1) - St John's Coptic Orthodox Church, 11 Dunbar Avenue, Beckenham, BR3 3RG. pdf icon PDF 121 KB

Additional documents:

Decision:

PERMISSION

 

Minutes:

Description of application – Construction of church community hall with basement space, lightwells and railings.

 

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, subject to the conditions and informatives set out in the report of the Chief Planner with an amendment to Condition 4 to read:-

“4. The building hereby permitted shall not operate before 0800 nor after 2200 Monday to Saturday, nor before 0900 or after 2130 on Sundays.

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

 

Mottingham and Chislehurst North

9.10

(18/02003/FULL6) - 132 Beaconsfield Road, Mottingham, London, SE9 4DT pdf icon PDF 91 KB

Additional documents:

Decision:

PERMISSION

 

Minutes:

Description of application – Two storey side extension with a loft conversion and rear dormer set within the roof slope.

 

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 and informative set out in the report of the Chief Planner.

 

Chislehurst

9.11

(18/02209/FULL1) - Hillcroft, Southill Road, Chislehurst, BR7 5EE pdf icon PDF 132 KB

Additional documents:

Decision:

PERMISSION

 

Minutes:

Description of application – Demolition of existing dwelling and erection of detached three storey building comprising 4 two bedroom flats and 2 one bedroom flats with 6 car parking spaces 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 a supplementary photograph had been received from the agent and circulated to Members.  It was also reported the last measurement contained in the table of dimensions of current and previous applications, on page 155 of the Chief Planner’s report should be amended to read, “17.6 m”.

Also on page 162, the measurement on line 3, paragraph 6, of ’15.9m’ should be amended to read, “17.6m”.

 

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.

 

Farnborough and Crofton Conservation Area

9.12

(18/02337/FULL6) - Farfield, 43 Park Avenue, Farnborough, Orpington, BR6 8LH. pdf icon PDF 119 KB

Additional documents:

Decision:

PERMISSION

 

Minutes:

Description of application – Part one/part two-storey rear extension with first floor balcony and replacement attached double garage incorporating first floor front and rear dormers.

 

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, subject to the conditions and informative set out in the report of the Chief Planner with two further conditions to read:-

“6.  Details of the windows (including rooflights and dormers where appropriate) including their materials, method of opening and drawings showing sections through mullions, transoms and glazing bars and sills, arches, lintels and reveals (including dimension of any recess) shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before any work is commenced.  The windows shall be installed 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 appearance of the building and the visual amenities of the area.

7.  Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any Order amending, revoking and re-enacting this Order) no building, structure or alteration permitted by Class A, B, C, or E of Part 1 of  Schedule 2 of the 1995 Order (as amended), 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:  To enable the Council to consider future development at the site in the interest of local amenity and the character and appearance of the Conservation Area, in accordance with policies BE1, BE11 and H8 of the Unitary Development Plan.”

 

Bromley Common and Keston

9.13

(18/02338/FULL6) - 2 Cowper Road, Bromley, BR2 9RX pdf icon PDF 90 KB

Additional documents:

Decision:

PERMISSION

 

Minutes:

Description of application – Part one/two storey side/rear extension and front porch.

 

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, subject to the conditions set out in the report of the Chief Planner.

 

Bickley

9.14

(18/02366/FULL1) - 17 Park Farm Road, Bromley, BR1 2PE pdf icon PDF 126 KB

Additional documents:

Decision:

PERMISSION

 

Minutes:

Description of application – Demolition of existing building and construction of two and a half storey detached house with accommodation in roof space and double garage integrated in ground floor level.

 

Oral representations in objection to the application were received at the meeting.  A supplementary plan and photograph had been received from the objector and supplementary information together with a plan and photograph had been received from the agent and circulated to Members.  It was reported that objections from the Sundridge Residents’ Association had been received.

 

The Chairman said there were no significant differences between the previous application that had been upheld on appeal and supported the application.  Councillor Dykes had visited the site and also supported the application.

 

Councillor Fawthrop and Councillor Angela Page objected to the application being an overdevelopment that would impact on residential amenity of neighbours.

 

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.

 

The vote for permission was 4:4 and the Chairman took his casting vote.

 

 

Section 4

(Applications recommended for refusal or disapproval of details)

10.

CONTRAVENTIONS AND OTHER ISSUES

11.

TREE PRESERVATION ORDERS

12.

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: