Agenda item

Bromley Town Ward

Description of application – Demolition of existing building and erection of a part 7, part 11, part 17 mixed use building comprising 210 sqm community uses (use class D1/D2), 42 sqm office use (flexible B1(a) and A3 use) and 68 residential flats with associated landscaping and public realm works, new pedestrian links, refuse and cycle parking stores, plant room and 3 disabled parking spaces.

Oral representations in support of the application were received from Mr Mark Gibney on behalf of the applicants.

Mr Gibney stated that Members were familiar with the previous application which had been approved following appeal.  The application now before the Committee was virtually identical however the applicant was seeking to replace office space into residential units.  The issue of wheelchair access has been resolved earlier in the day and the applicant was proposing that four out of the proposed sixteen new residential units should be allocated as social housing.  Mr Gibney reported that the site was ready to be developed.  If approved the proposed application would make a valuable contribution to Bromley Town Centre.

In response to Member questions, Mr Gibney stated that following approval of the original application on appeal, and on review the applicant had felt that the development would be complicated with the office space that had been proposed and had therefore wanted to deliver more housing in the Town Centre.  In relation to disabled parking bays and car club parking, Mr Gibney reported that the site was constrained in relation to additional disabled parking bays although additional on-street parking was available and essentially there was no demand for additional car club spaces as a result of the proposals.  Finally, Mr Gibney reported that he had not been instructed by his client as to whether an appeal would be pursued in the event of the Committee refusing the application.

The Deputy DC Manager reported that through submission of updated plans and an updated accommodation schedule, the applicant had confirmed that the provision of wheelchair user dwellings within the development would be in accordance with the requirements set out in London Plan Policy 3.8 and the Mayors Housing SPG.  The second reason for refusal as set out in the report was therefore removed from the recommendation.

Members expressed concerns surrounding the reduction in commercial floor space that was being proposed recognising the need for commercial floor space in the town centre.  Concerns were also raised around inadequate disabled parking provision and inadequate provision of car club spaces.  Furthermore, Members expressed concerns surrounding the lack of affordable housing provided by the proposed development.

The Chairman moved that the application be refused on the grounds outlined in the amended report tabled.

Members having considered the report and the update tabled at the meeting, objections and representations.

RESOLVED that PERMISSION BE REFUSED  for the following reason:

1. Viability has not been agreed and the proposed development has not provided the required 35% provision of on-site affordable housing required under Policy H2 of the Unitary Development Plan and does not provide adequate justification for the proposed off-site payment in lieu, contrary to Policy H3 of the Unitary Development Plan (2006), Policy BTC3 of the Bromley Town Centre Area Action Plan (2010), Policies 3.9, 3.11 and 3.12 of the London Plan (2015) and Paragraph 50 of the National Planning Policy Framework (2012).