Agenda, decisions and draft minutes

Development Control Committee - Tuesday 10 January 2023 7.30 pm

Venue: Bromley Civic Centre

Contact: Kerry Nicholls  020 8461 7840

Items
No. Item

41.

APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE AND NOTIFICATION OF SUBSTITUTE MEMBERS

Decision:

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Mark Brock and Councillor Thomas Turrell attended as his substitute.  Apologies for absence were also received from Councillor Kevin Kennedy-Brooks.

Minutes:

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Mark Brock and Councillor Thomas Turrell attended as his substitute.  Apologies for absence were also received from Councillor Kevin Kennedy-Brooks.

42.

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

Decision:

Councillor Tony McPartlan declared he was a Governor of King’s College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust.

Minutes:

Councillor Tony McPartlan declared that he was a Governor of King’s College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust.

 

Councillor David Jefferys, Guest Member declared that he was also a Governor of King’s College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust.

43.

QUESTIONS BY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC ATTENDING THE MEETING

In accordance with the Council’s Constitution, questions that are not specific to reports on the agenda must have been received in writing 10 working days before the date of the meeting.

 

Questions specifically relating to reports on the agenda should be received within two working days of the normal publication date of the agenda.  Please ensure that questions specifically relating to reports on the agenda are received by the Democratic Services Team by 5.00pm on Wednesday 4 January 2023.

Decision:

NONE.

Minutes:

No questions were received.

44.

CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING HELD ON 8 NOVEMBER 2022 pdf icon PDF 212 KB

Decision:

APPROVED.

Minutes:

RESOLVED: That the minutes of the meeting held on 8 November 2022 be agreed and signed as a correct record.

45.

(22/00740/FULL1) - The Princess Royal University Hospital, Farnborough Common, Orpington, BR6 8ND (Farnborough and Crofton Ward) pdf icon PDF 2 MB

Decision:

APPROVED WITH GROUNDS OF PERMISSION.

Minutes:

Description of Application: Erection of an endoscopy unit and a sub-station.

 

The Planning Officer gave a brief presentation, providing an overview of the application and update on the report.

 

Oral representations in support of the application were received from the Chief Executive of the Princess Royal University Hospital (PRUH) who gave the following responses to Members’ questions:

 

·  Improved cancer diagnosis and treatment was a key priority in Bromley’s Health and Wellbeing Strategy.  One in two people would develop cancer in their lifetime.  Although the cancer treatment standard of no more than two-weeks between GP referral and initial assessment was currently being met across King’s College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, targets for the diagnostic tool of endoscopy services were not being met.  These services were often outsourced to other providers across South East London and the PRUH had to make significant use of its general operating theatres to deliver endoscopy procedures on a daily basis. 

 

·  While it was anticipated that artificial intelligence would improve clinical practice over the medium to long term, this would only be appropriate for a limited number of patients and the proposed unit was therefore considered an appropriate and necessary investment, particularly as an increasing number of patients required return surveillance.  Councillor Simon Fawthrop asked whether the PRUH would be prepared to accept a planning condition that the proposed unit could only be used for endoscopy with any change of use requiring a further planning application and the Chief Executive confirmed that this would be acceptable.

 

·  The PRUH had worked with the Council for over 18 months to review and develop options for the new endoscopy unit and had provided all necessary and requested documents.  The Chief Executive drew Members’ attention to an inconsistency in the Planning Officer’s report which did not reflect the cycle storage that was included in the design scheme.  The new unit would deliver six additional endoscopy facilities with one existing facility in the main PRUH building to be retained for critical emergency endoscopies.  This was anticipated to provide sufficient capacity to 2036, based on the current trend of 3% annual growth.  The five endoscopy theatres at the Denmark Hill site would also be retained, reflecting the high demand for this clinical area which was divided equally between active interventions and diagnostic procedures.

 

·  A range of sites had been considered across Bromley and the wider King’s Group.  However, due to the invasive nature of endoscopic tests and procedures, the proposed unit could only be based at Denmark Hill or the PRUH which had the necessary co-located critical services.  Government funding was only being made available for units that met all technical clinical standards under the Joint Royal Colleges.  A service offer divided across multiple sites would not meet these standards and would have additional cost and efficiency implications.  There was no scope to co-locate services with the Guys and St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust or the Lewisham and Greenwich NHS Trust as both Trusts already had set plans for the expansion of their  ...  view the full minutes text for item 45.

46.

(22/03013/FULL1) - Clifford House, 1 Calverley Close, Beckenham, BR3 1UH (Beckenham Town and Copers Cope Ward) pdf icon PDF 2 MB

Additional documents:

Decision:

PERMISSION, SUBJECT TO A S106 AGREEMENT AND ANY DIRECTION BY THE MAYOR OF LONDON

Minutes:

Description of Application: Demolition of existing buildings and phased redevelopment comprising 275 residential homes in buildings ranging from 3 to 7 storeys. Associated landscaping, car and cycle parking and ancillary development.

 

The Planning Officer gave a brief presentation, providing an overview of the application and update on the report.

 

Oral representations in support of the application were received from the Agent who gave the following responses to Members’ questions:

 

·  In developing the proposals for the future of the estate, a full life cycle assessment had been completed which demonstrated that the necessary improvements could only be delivered through redevelopment of the site.  Extensive engagement had been undertaken with residents who were in favour of the proposed redevelopment.  The majority of homes on the redeveloped site would be wheelchair accessible and additional residential units would also be created.  The proposed parking provision was supported by the Council and Transport for London and strong public transport links were also in place.

 

·  The duration of the redevelopment scheme was 10-years and would provide a single decant option to existing residents to enable them to remain within their settled community throughout the construction period, although the option of moving to alternate accommodation with the right to return would also be available.  Riverside had partnered with Countryside for the scheme which had a proven track record in development as well as a strong interest in delivering the private residential units at the end of the redevelopment scheme.  Riverside was confident that the recent increases in building materials costs were levelling out.

 

Councillor Michael Tickner, visiting Ward Member, addressed the Committee, underlining that the planning application referred to the redevelopment of the entire estate and not just Clifford House.  This 1970s housing estate had been well-built but poorly designed and would benefit from the proposed redevelopment.  The Member had some reservations about parking provision as Outer London residents were more reliant on cars and a reduced number of parking spaces could create issues with on-street parking, particularly when events were held at Beckenham Place Park.  Councillor Tickner concluded that the scheme was acceptable, particularly in the light of a possible reduction in car use in the medium to long-term as car ownership declined.  Any other arising issues could be addressed by planning conditions.

 

Councillor Will Connolly, visiting Ward Member, addressed the Committee and listed a number of positive factors about the proposed scheme including: the creation of new homes; the reduced height of the development; new play spaces; and improvements to pathways and lighting that would help maintain the low crime rates on the estate.  There were some concerns around increased HGV use of the site as well as potential issues for cyclists traversing the three new access roads.  The Planning Officer advised that use of the site by HGVs would be managed via the Construction Environmental Management Plan and that the developer had agreed to contribute £50k to a new pedestrian/cyclist crossing to support road safety.  In response to further questions, the Planning Officer explained  ...  view the full minutes text for item 46.

47.

Local Plan Review: Issues and Options Consultation pdf icon PDF 144 KB

Additional documents:

Decision:

NOTED.

Minutes:

Report HPR2023/004

 

The Committee considered a report providing details of the proposed ‘Issues and Options’ Local Plan consultation.

 

In response to a question from a Member, the Head of Planning Policy and Strategy confirmed that the public consultation on the ‘Issues and Options’ Local Plan was likely to commence in Spring 2023.  In considering the example section provided at Appendix 1, a Member observed the challenge inherent to optimising the capacity of housing sites in the Borough while preserving the character of its communities. 

 

RESOLVED: That:

 

1)  Details of the proposed Local Plan ‘Issues and Options’ consultation be noted, including the example section provided at Appendix 1; and,

 

2)  It be noted that the final decision to approve the ‘Issues and Options’ draft for public consultation will be for the Director of Housing, Planning, Property and Regeneration, in discussion with the Portfolio Holder for Renewal, Recreation and Housing.

48.

Councillor Planning Application 'Call Ins' pdf icon PDF 302 KB

Decision:

NOTED.

Minutes:

Report HPR2023/005

 

The Committee considered a report outlining Councillor ‘call-ins’ for planning applications between 5 May 2022 and 31 October 2022 alongside an updated Figure 1 - Planning application ‘call ins’ for applications determined within period May – Oct 2022 which included the ultimate method of decision.

 

The Chairman noted that 96-97% of planning applications were now decided under delegated powers and that the majority of planning applications considered at Plans Sub-Committees during the 6-month period had been call-ins by Members.  Another Member welcomed the close working of Members and Planning Officers which had increased the proportion of planning applications decided under delegated powers.  The Member who had requested the updated Figure 1 underlined the importance of putting into context how many call-ins were considered by the Plans Sub-Committees or under delegated authority and requested that the same format be used for future reporting.

 

RESOLVED: That the report be noted.