Agenda item

Description of application – Demolition of existing buildings except Bassetts House.  Redevelopment of site comprising alterations to and change of use of Bassetts House to residential (Class C3) and conversion to form 13 flats (7 x 1 bed, 4 x 2 bed and 2 x 3 bed), erection of 102 dwellings (16 x 1 bed flats, 26 x 2 bed flats, 5 x 3 bed houses, 52 x 4 bed houses and 3 x 5 bed houses) and associated car parking (175 spaces), cycle parking and landscaping (including new boundary treatment) and other associated works.

 

The following oral representations in support of the application were received from the applicant’s agent, Mr Will Edmunds:-

 

The scheme consisted of high quality residential properties.  The applicant had positively engaged with Council officers and residents and attempted to resolve all concerns.  The benefits of the changes of use would include:-

 

·  restoration and long-term use of the building;

·  ecological works;

·  provision of 115 new homes – 10% of which were affordable housing;

·  retention of trees;

·  175 parking spaces managed through a parking permit scheme;

·  CPZ contributions;

·  restriction of vehicular access.

 

In response to Member questions, Mr Edmunds stated that a parking permit scheme would be managed on site with 130 parking spaces provided for the properties and 45 spaces for visitor use, which was the maximum allowance for the site.  With regard to TfL’s statement that there would be too many visitor parking bays, Mr Edmunds confirmed that these could be used by residents.  It was anticipated that development would begin almost immediately, with the first homes being available for occupation in approximately 12 months’ time.

 

Bassetts Pond would be protected from over-accumulation of water by improved drainage and sub-systems.  A filtration system would also be installed to improve the quality of the water which would be controlled by a tap-like system.

 

Orpington Field Club had raised concerns about the protection of the great crested newt habitat and objected to the proposal to provide car-parking spaces in this area.  Mr Edmunds confirmed that the scheme had been amended to achieve minimal incursion into the SINC area and had no impact on nature preservation.

 

The Planning Officer reported that further correspondence had been received and provided a verbal summary to the Committee.  The scheme had been amended by revised landscaping plans received on 27 May 2016.  Should the application be permitted, minor changes to the stated conditions would be required.

 

As an important development within Farnborough and Crofton, Ward Member Councillor Joel asked the Planning Officer to respond to the following:-

 

‘1)  There is some confusion regarding car parking provision where the report states there will be 175 spaces including 45 visitor spaces, therefore providing 130 for residents.  In the report under the Highways section (page 64), this evaluates to 1.5 per dwelling.  Can a more detailed breakdown be provided covering each type of dwelling with the relevant total numbers?  What bearing or effect will it have on the point made by TFL in item 10, page 12 of the report?

 

2)  I am requesting a suitable fence or railings be provided around the perimeter edge of the landscaped area to Bassetts Pond in the need for safety and protection of children, wildlife etc.  It is accepted that some form of lockable gating will need to be incorporated in order to undertake maintenance.  I accept this can be covered by condition in item 4, page 87 of the report.

 

3)  It can be seen that building works to Bassetts House are currently in hand prior to receiving approval to this application.  This had already been drawn to the attention of the Chief Planner and I am led to believe the situation was being investigated.  Can the officer confirm the details bearing in mind condition 3 on page 32 of the agenda.

 

4)  With Bassetts House being a listed building and having a distinctive character, is the use of PPC aluminium double glazed window units acceptable?  It is noted that samples are required to be deposited to the Council prior to the commencement of the work for approval.  Furthermore, it is mentioned in the report that black PVC rainwater goods are not acceptable.  There are a number of other products available such as black powder coated aluminium with a design pattern that will compliment a listed building.  It is accepted that this can be covered by condition.

 

5)  The internal road within the proposed development i.e. second paragraph, page 81, addresses it as a private estate to be managed and maintained by an independent company appointed by the developers. For the benefit of local residents who have raised concerns, can it be taken that the Council will not have any involvement other than road sweeping and refuse collection?

 

6)  The question has also been raised as to whether the development could be secured by a controlled gating system to detract other outside car users from parking on the complex.  It works very well on the Farnborough Park and Keston Park Estates and elsewhere throughout the Borough.  There is an horrendous parking problem in the area mainly due to the overspill from the PRU Hospital.’

 

In response to Councillor Joel’s questions, the Planning Officer confirmed the following:-

 

1)  The total parking provision on site was 175 spaces, including both allocated and unallocated parking spaces.  In respect of the breakdown of allocated spaces, this was confirmed as follows:-

 

·  55 flats – 1 space each;

·  4 x 3 bedroom houses – 1 space each;

·  1 x 3 bedroom house – 2 spaces;

·  40 x4 bedroom houses – 1 space each;

·  12 x 4 bedroom houses – 2 spaces each;

·  2 x 5 bedroom houses – 2 spaces each;

·  1 x 5 bedroom house – 1 allocated space (with room on the driveway for an additional parking space).

 

The majority of dwellings (100) across the site would benefit from 1 car parking space each, whilst 14 of the larger dwellings and one 3 bed dwelling would each be allocated 2 spaces.  It was also anticipated that future occupiers would have some flexible access to the unallocated (visitor) parking spaces, details of which could be secured through condition 22.

 

In respect of objections received from Transport for London (TfL), Members were advised that a request had been made to reduce parking provision for the smaller flatted units but in this instance, given the low PTAL rating of the site, the proposed level was considered to be acceptable.

 

2)  Details of a boundary treatment to the Bassetts Pond area would be required by condition.

 

3)  A planning investigations officer had visited the site in early May and confirmed that works taking place at that time did not require planning permission.  The works undertaken to date generally related to remedial works and repairs to Bassetts House.  In addition, the officer advised that a structure to house electrical equipment had been built alongside the boundary to Starts Hill Road.  Officers confirmed that this required planning permission and would need to be regularised at the earliest opportunity and that the applicant had been advised accordingly.

 

4)  Bassetts House was a locally listed building and the proposed materials for repair works were generally satisfactory.  It was confirmed that the Conservation Officer was satisfied with the proposed use of aluminium windows in the building.  However, it was noted that concerns had been expressed in the report regarding the use of UPVC guttering where the preference would be for a metal guttering and it would, therefore, be recommended that full details were secured by condition.

 

5)  The internal road would remain private; it was not intended to be offered for adoption by the Council and the Council would be responsible for refuse collection. 

 

6)  The application did not currently propose gates across the Starts Hill Road access to the site.  Should it be considered necessary in future, this could be dealt with by way of a separate application for planning permission.

 

Councillor Joel thanked officers for producing a detailed and comprehensive report.

 

The three Ward Councillors had been in close liaison with the Case Officer throughout various stages about concerns raised by local residents, mainly in relation to the number of units, density, car parking, boundaries and the protection of wild life, trees and the preservation of Bassetts Pond.  The report had covered the various points raised and where necessary, had included a condition that relevant details were to be confirmed in writing and approved by the Council.

 

It could be seen that effectively, the scheme could be construed as a private housing estate and that the parking facilities, upkeep and maintenance of the site would be managed by an independent company appointed by the developers.  The developers and their adopted agents had designed and constructed the inner road which would not be offered up to the Council for adoption.

 

There was mention of poor public transport links however, there were bus services in Starts Hill Road, the A21 and Crofton Road with good connections to Bromley, Orpington and elsewhere in the region.

 

Councillor Joel had taken the opportunity to discuss the impact of additional residents to the area with three of the local schools and a GP surgery practice but received very little response.

 

Towards the end of last year, he was invited, together with Councillor Tim Stevens, to visit the London Square Developments in Hayes Common and both were impressed with the standard of workmanship and care and attention being given to the site and its surroundings.  As a result, the three Ward Councillors for Farnborough and Crofton considered the design and planning would complement the area.

 

With the support and agreement of fellow Ward Councillors, Councillor Joel moved approval of the application.  The motion was seconded by the Chairman.

 

Councillor Buttinger requested that the habitat of great crested newts at the site be protected by condition and bat boxes be installed to enhance the environment.  She also requested that officers consider talking with Orpington Field Club in regard to landscaping.

 

Councillor Allen believed further consideration should be given in regard to the provision of affordable housing.  The Planning Officer confirmed that 12 affordable units were incorporated into the scheme.

 

Councillor Bosshard considered the Council would receive less than it should from the proposed S106 contribution as the profit achieved by the development would far exceed what was originally anticipated.  The Planning Officer reported that S106 monies would mitigate health and education needs.

 

Charging points for electric cars could be installed in the visitor bays; this would not prohibit anyone from using the bays for normal parking.

 

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, with the inclusion of some minor amendments.