Agenda item

(Report to follow)

Description of application – Proposed construction of three, three storey buildings to provide 24, 2 bed 4 person flats with associated parking and landscaping.

Oral representations in objection to the application were received from Mr Tony Banfield, Chair of Bromley Civic Society.  Mr Banfield objected on the following grounds:-

·  Concerns regarding vibration during construction work as Sheppard’s College had no foundations.

·  In regard to the number of flats to be provided, a previous application for 25 units was refused by Members in 2003.

·  The significant importance of heritage assets.  The northern aspect should have been assessed for its historic significance.

·  This would be an unsustainable development, harmful to the Conservation Area and the significance of designated heritage assets.

An addendum updating the Committee on a previous application was circulated to Members and can be viewed as Annex A to these Minutes.

The Planning Officer advised that should Members be minded to permit the application, two additional conditions would be required as follows:-

1.  A safeguarding condition to ensure that the listed wall was not unduly damaged during or after construction.

2.  A compliance condition to ensure the Air Quality Assessment was complied with.

Members were also advised that the officer recommendation had been amended to read ‘Application Permitted Subject to a Section 106 Legal Agreement’.

The published report stated that the site was allocated for 70 dwellings however, this had been updated within the five year housing land supply document and 24 units were now allocated for the site.

Ward Member Councillor Dykes considered the current proposal to be an improvement on the previous application.  However, taking into consideration the representations received from the Bromley Civic Society, particularly in regard to the Conservation Area and the Listed Building, she was unsure whether the application enhanced the site.

Ward Member Councillor Harmer deemed the application to be uninspiring and of little architectural merit.  This was however, an opportunity site identified in Bromley’s Area Action Plan. 

Councillor Fawthrop referred to the comments submitted by APCA which stated the application did not reflect the Inspector’s previous decision.  He  suggested the applicant be requested to amend the application to be more sympathetic in regard to preserving views into and out of the Conservation Area.  The proposed parking provision was inadequate and the number of electric car charging spaces should be 100%.

Councillor Turner stated that in planning terms, there were no grounds to refuse the application.  This was agreed by Councillor Dean who moved that

the application be granted.

Having visited the site, Councillor Terry observed that the development would be close to the Grade II listed building.  In regard to landscaping, it was important to protect the building and to ensure that the tree line was retained.  He therefore suggested that condition 16 be strengthened for added protection.  The Planning Officer advised that Tree Preservation Orders could be issued on replacement trees in perpetuity.

Councillors Brooks supported the application.  The applicant had done what was required; the site was identified within the AAP and Bromley’s housing target needed to be met.

Councillor Bear requested the addition of a Dust Management Plan condition.

Councillor Joel referred to the Victorian detached houses which were demolished to make way for the Kentish Way project.  These works had resulted in an improvement in traffic movement into Bromley.  The current proposal was a more simple design and he suggested the applicant carry out a survey in regard to the boundary wall and that discussions take place with the owners of the adjoining property.

The Chairman agreed that the current proposal was an improvement on previous applications and met the Council’s requirements in terms of wide spaces between blocks and good tree screening which would alleviate concerns of the College.

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 together with the following additions and amendments:-

1.  A safeguarding condition to protect the wall between the College and the site including protection against all effects during construction.

2.  An Air Quality Compliance condition.

3.  Condition 16 be strengthened in regard to extending the time period for retention of new landscaping beyond five years with a view to TPOs being issued on replacement trees in the future.

4.  A Dust Management Plan condition.

A vote on Councillor Fawthrop’s motion to provide 100% electric car charging spaces fell.

IT WAS FURTHER RESOLVED THAT PERMISSION BE GRANTED SUBJECT TO A SECTION 106 LEGAL AGREEMENT.